Of the Church fiue bookes. By Richard Field Doctor of Diuinity and sometimes Deane of Glocester.

AN ANSWER TO M^r Brerelyes obiection concerning the Masse, publiquelie vsed in all Churches at LVTHERS appearing.

WHereas to silence our adversaries, who neuer cease challenging vs for departing from the faith of our Fathers, and the doctrine of the Church, wherein they liued and died; I affir∣med in my 3^• Booke, that none of those erro∣neous positions, which at this day they of the Romish faction doe defend, and wee impugne, were euer constantly receiued in the dayes of our Fathers, as the doctrine of that Church wherein they liued and died: but onely doubt∣fully disputed of, as things not clearely resol∣ued, or broached onely as the priuate fancies and conceipts of particular men: and for proofe heereof heeretofore added an Appendix, wherein I produced the testimonies of sundry worthy Pastours and guides of the Church in euery age; teaching as we doe, touching the points now controversed; It hath pleased some of the adverse faction, to take excepti∣ons to the same my assertion. I will first therefore set downe such objections, as they haue made, and answere the same, and then enlarge my former proofes, that all that will not be wilfully blinde, may see the trueth of that which I af∣firmed.

The principall man that shewed himselfe in this kinde is M^• Brerelie, the Author of the booke entitled the Protestant Apologie. And after him the author of the answer to M^r D Whites way to the Church.

M Brerelie in the first tract pag. 139, hath these words. It is beyond beleefe and very wonderment, that D Field, a man otherwise graue, and learned, should not be abashed by his publique writing, so confidently to averre, of our so many Christian Catho∣lique Churches, dispersed thorough the world at Luthers first appearing; that they were all of them the true Protestant Churches of God. And that they which then beleeued those damnable errours which the Romanists now defend, were a particular faction onely, contrary to the confession of so ma∣ny learned Protestants. And in his 2 tract, cap. 2. sect. 2, pag. 329. hee hath these words. In this vndue sort doth Illyricus place in his catalogue of Pro∣testant witnesses, Gerson, Aquinas, and sundry of our Schoolemen, all of them vndoubtedly knowne Catholiques; and we could giue like farther example of S. Bernard, Erasmus, Mirandula, and sundry other knowne Catholique Writers, whom our adversaries in like manner doe vnjustly claime to bee of their Church. D Field a prime adversarie (and for such, was together with the Bishops and Deanes, summoned to the conference before his Majestie in Ianuarie 1603, as appeareth by the said conference) forbeareth not in these straits to inforce the like vndue and intollerable bold claime to the many Catholiques (a particular faction of them onely excepted) dis∣persed thorough the world, at, and next before Luthers first appearing. And in his third Booke of the Church, cap. 12. pag. 85, saith, nothing is done in the Protestant reformation, which Camaracensis, Picus, Savanarola, Gerson, and innumerable other worthy guides of Gods Church, long before thought 〈◊〉〈◊〉 fit to bee done. And pag. 330, M^r Brerelie addeth these wordes.

D. Feild of the Church l. 3. c. 6. sayth, it is most fond & friuolous that some demaund, where our Church was before Luther began. For we say it was where now it is, and that it was the knowne & apparant Church in the world, where all our Fathers liued & died. And most exceeding boldly hee there farther sayth, none of the poynts of false doctrine & errour, which the Ro∣manists now maintaine, & we condemne, were the doctrines of that Church, constantly deliuered, or generally receiued, but doubtfully broached, and fa∣ctiously defended by some certaine only. And booke the third, cap. 8. pag. 76, he proceedeth yet farther with like incredible boldnesse, saying, we must farther beleeue, that all the Churches in the world, wherein our Fathers liued & died, were the true Churches of God, & that they that taught the errours the Romanists now defend against vs, were a faction only, as they that denied the resurrection, vrged circumcision, & despised the Apostles of Christ, were in the Churches of Corinth & Galatia. Who can without amazement and wonder, behold this incredible boldnesse? For was not the Masse, wherein are comprehended so many cheife points of our Religion, the publique liturgie solemnly celebrated in all Churches, at Luthers first appearing? Was then the externall face of religion, any other then our now professed Catholique faith? Was Protestancie then so much as in beeing? No marvaile then, if our aduer∣saries doubt not to make vndue and pretended claime to the auncient Fathers, seeing they blush not to affirme the same, exceeding boldly & vntruly, of the time in which Luther first began, which is yet within the memory of this present age. Others affirme the Church to haue beene then invisible, directly against that, which M. D. Feild next before so boldly affirmed; into which bold assertion hee ventured, onely thereby to avoyd the other absurd paradoxe of the supposed Churches beeing invisible, which so many learned Protestants haue also disclaymed heretofore; as on the other part, they who so affirmed their Churches then beeing invisible, affirmed the same, as enfor∣ced therevnto, in regard of the knowne pregnant vntrueth, of M. D. Feilds o∣ther assertion, in affirming the Church to haue beene then knowne & visible. Vpon such dangerous rocks are our aduersaries driuen in their thus sayling betweene Scylla & Charibdis

Heere we see is much adoe, as if some thing had beene written by me, that were beyond all beliefe, and a very wonderment. But what strange thing is it, that is thus wondered at? Surely it is nothing else, but that I haue affir∣med; that all those Christian Catholique Churches, in the West part of the world, where the Pope formerly tyranized, and where our Fathers liued and dyed, were the true Protestant Churches of God; and that the maintayners of those errours, superstitious abuses, & Papall tyranny, which wee dislike, were in that they maintayned, the same, and so farre forth as they maintay∣ned any of them, but a faction only in those Churches. If this be all, I doubt not but so to make good what I haue written, that M^r Brerelie shall in the end wonder at himselfe, why hee contradicted it. For if by a Protestant Church, we meane a Church beleeuing & teaching in all poynts as Protestants doe, and beleeuing & teaching nothing but that they doe, it shall bee proued & demon∣strated, that the Latine or West Church, wherein the Pope tyrannized before Luthers time, was & continued a true Protestant Church. For the Church that then was, beleeued & taught all that wee doe, and nothing else; it con∣demned those prophane & superstitious abuses which wee haue removed; and groaned vnder that tyranny, the yoake whereof we haue now cast off; howso∣ever there were many in the midst of her, that taught otherwise, that brought in & maintayned, intollerable, & superstitious abuses, & sought to advance the Popes ouerruling greatnes and supremacy. But if by a Protestant Church they vnderstand, a Church that not only complayneth of Papall tyranny, and vsurpation, & sheweth her dislike of the same, but that hath cast off the yoake,

and that not onely disliketh abuses, but removeth them, & that not only teach∣eth all necessary & sauing trueth, but suffereth none within the compasse of her jurisdiction to teach otherwise: wee confesse that no part of the Westerne Church, was in this sort a Protestant Church, till a reformation was begun of evills formerly disliked. But M Brerelie sayth, Protestancie was not in be∣ing before Luthers time, & that therefore the Christian Catholique Chur∣ches, wherein our Fathers liued & dyed, could not in any sort truely bee sayd to bee Protestant Churches. Wherevnto our answere is, that ifby Prote∣stancie bee meant, the beleeuing of all that, and that onely, which they that are now named Protestants doe beleeue, & the professing of a dislike of such abu∣ses, & Papall vsurpations, as they haue now cast off: it was in beeing many a∣ges, and long before Luther was borne; and all those Christian Catholique Churches, wherein our Fathers liued & died were Protestant Churches. But this Master Brerelie thinketh vnaunswerablie to confute, because the Masse, where so many poynts of the Romish Religion are contayned, was the pub∣lique liturgie solemnly celebrated in all Churches, at & before Luthers appea∣ring, and the externall face of religion was no other, then the now professed Roman faith. For aunswere wherevnto, I will first shew that the vsing of the Masse as the publique liturgie, is no good proofe of that Master Brerely vndertaketh to proue. Secondly I will make it to appeare, that the externall face of Religion before Luthers time, was not as Master Brerelie would make vs to beleeue, the Roman faith now professed.

Touching the Masse foure things are to be obserued. The name, The canon it selfe, The sinister consecrations & manifold abuses in practise besides and contrary to the words of the canon, & the intendment of them that first com∣posed the same; and lastly sundry apocryphall vaine superstitious & idle things crept into the publique seruice of the Church.

Touching the first it is knowen, that the celebration of the holy mysterie, & sacrament of the Lords body & blood, had the name of Masse, from the dismissing of all non-communicants before the consecration began. So that none stayed, but such as were to communicate. The auncient custome was, sayth Cassander in his consultation, that none might bee present at the conse∣cration, but such as were to communicate. For, as Chrysostome sheweth, as they * 1.1 that were not baptized might not stay, no more might they that were impure & guilty of any grievous sinne, so that they were not fitte to communicate. b 1.2 And to this purpose was that most auncient obseruation of all Churches, that by the voyce of the deacon, missa seu missio denunciabatur, catechumenis & non communicantibus ante consecrationem, that is, that the Catechumens & all non∣communicants were dismissed before the consecration; the deacon crying out with a loud voyce, si quis non communicet exeat; si quis non communicet det lo∣cum, if any communicate not, let him depart. So that hence it came, that the name of Masse was giuen to sundry parts of the liturgie; for whereas all might be present at some part of the diuine seruice; that part was called missa catechu∣menorum, for that the catechumens might bee present at it; and it was ended before their dismissing. But the other part, which consisteth in the consecra∣tion, oblation, & participation, is called missa fidelium; for that the faithfull onely who were fitte to communicate, might be present at it, all non-com∣municants being first dismissed & sent away. This maketh against the present abuse of the Romane Church wherein all stay, and yet none communicate but the priest alone; & many are made beleeue, it is sufficient to be present, though they doe not prepare themselues, so as to bee fitte, to communicate; nay often∣times such as would communicate are repelled. This was the fault of some, in the Church wherein our Fathers liued, but not without the dislike of the bet∣ter sorte. And therefore, as Cassander telleth vs, Henricus de Gorrichem in tra∣ctatu de effectu missae propos. 23, reprehendeth certaine pastours of his age, who

could hardly endure, that some of their Parishioners, desired euery Sunday to receiue the Sacrament, though they liued laudably. And hee addeth, that seeing the same devotion that was in the Primitiue Church, when men communicated euery day, is still to be found in some, the Pastour should not dislike it, if any a∣mongst the common people be so devout, as to desire to communicate euery Sunday, and some other dayes also. So that there wanted not of the people in former times, that desired to communicate aswell as to be present, nor of the guides that encouraged them so to doe; and therefore hitherto nothing can be proued against my assertion. Wherefore let vs come to the Masse it selfe;

Amongst all the Sacraments of the Church, that is the principall, saith c 1.3 Du∣randus, that is celebrated vpon the table of the most holy Altar, representing that Feast, & banquet of the Church, wherein the father vpon the returne of his lost sonne, caused the fatlings to be slaine, & setteth out the bread of life, & the wine which wisedome hath mixed for her friends & louers. These mysteries, & this holy Sacrament, Christ then instituted, when he made his new and last testament, disposing to his heires a kingdome, as his father had disposed to him, that vpon his Table they might eat & drinke in his kingdome, that which the Church hath consecrated, for as they were at supper, Iesus tooke bread, and when he had giuen thanks, blessed it, brake it, & gaue it to his Disciples, saying, take, & eat, this is my body which shalbe giuen for you, doe this in the remem∣brance of me. The Apostles following this institution, began to celebrate these mysteries for the same end that Christ had expressed, keeping the same forme in words, and vsing the same matter of bread & wine that he did, as the Apostle witnesseth to the Corinthians, where he saith, what I haue receiued of the Lord, I haue deliuered vnto you, who the same night that hee was betrayed, tooke bread, &c. and added to the forme of wordes vsed by Christ, the Lords prayer. And S. Peter is said in this sort to haue celebrated first of all in the East parts. Wherefore in the beginnings of the Church, these mysteries were celebrated in another sort then since they haue bin. Afterwards, the reading of some parts of sacred scripture, & particularly of the Epist. & Gospell was added. Pope Cele∣stinus instituted the introitus, & other things were added at other times, & by others. Howsoeuer this is certain, there were, & are at this day, diuers formes of celebrating this mystery. For the formes of the East Churches are different from those of the West, & it appeareth that aunciently in France, Spain, & sun∣dry parts of Italy, they had other formes then now are vsed, more like to those * 1.4 of the East, which being in some things enlarged and perfitted by S. Ambrose, were called the Ambrosian forms of divine seruice. These cōtinued till the time of Charles the great. For thogh Gregory, as Io. Diaconus tels vs, taking the forms of celebrating masse which Gelasius had cōposed, adding somethings, detracting others, & changing others, brought in a new forme which the Church of Rome followed, yet the other churches of the west retained the old forms, which they had receiued frō their ancesters. And to this purpose it is, that Berno Augiensis testifieth, that amongst the monuments of his Abbey, there was found an olde •…•…all much different from those of Rome. But Charles the great, sought to bring the Provinces subiect to his Empire, to receiue the Romane forme by threats & punishment. We read, saith Durandus, in the life of blessed Eugenius, that while * 1.5 the forme of divine seruice which was named the Ambrosian forme, was more followed & obserued by the Church, then that of Gregory, Adrian the Pope cal∣led a councell, in which it was ordered, that the Gregorian forme should euery∣where be obserued. To the obseruation whereof Charles the Emperour by threats and punishments, forced the Cleargie in sundry Provinces, burning the olde Ambrosian bookes. And further hee addeth, that Saint Eugenius comming to a certaine councell called about this businesse, finding that the Bishoppes were gone, and the councell ended three dayes before his comming, induced the Pop•…•… to call the Bishoppes backe againe, which hee

did, and the councell being againe renued, it was agreed on by common consent, that both the missals, both that of Saint Ambrose and the o∣ther of Saint Gregorie, should be layed on the altar of Saint Peter the Apostle, that the doores of the Church should be fast locked, and sealed with the seale of sundry Bishops, and that then they should spend the whole night in prayer, beseeching God that he would shew by some signe, which of these hee would haue to be obserued in his Church; and in the morning entering, they found that of Gregory torne in peeces, and scattered all ouer the Church, the other o∣pened, but yet still lying entire and whole on the altar; of which accident they made this construction, that that of Gregorie was to be vsed euery where tho∣rough the world, the other only at Millain in S. Ambroses owne Church, and so saith Durand, it is vsed vnto this day. For by the helpe of Charles the great, that of Ambrose was disused in many Churches, & that other brought in place.

Onely the Christians of Spaine admitted not this alteration, notwithstan∣ding all these endeauours, till the time of Gregorie the seauenth, what time they were constrained by Alphonsus the sixt to giue way, which they did most vnwillingly, and not without teares. f 1.6 Rodericus reporteth, that when this alteration was vrged by the Popes legate, and the king, there being an as∣sembly of all the states; the Clergie, Nobilitie, and people resisted mainely a∣gainst it; whereupon in the end it was resolued, that that matter should be tried by cumbate, and one being chosen for the newe, and another for defense of the old, he that vndertooke the defense of the old preuailed, which caused a great reioycing among the people. But the king not regarding this triall, nor thinking it to bee any sufficient clearing of the matter questioned, it was agreed that both the bookes should be cast into the fire, that that which should bee preserued in the fire might bee allowed as best, which accor∣dingly being done, the booke of the old forme came forth vntouched, and the other was consumed: yet would not the king be perswaded to desist, but threatning death, and vtter confusion to all gainesayers, made this innouation in his Church and kingdome, all his subiects weeping and sorrowing, and then began the prouerbe Quo volunt reges vadunt leges. So that wee see, howsoeuer our aduersaries would make the simple beleeue, that things were euer as now they are, yet there haue beene great alterations in the forme of diuine seruice, and it is not to be doubted, but that the auncient formes as different from the latter, were more pure and sincere then they that are now vsed.

They that haue diligently looked into the monuments of antiquity, sayth Rhenanus, vpon Tertullians booke de corona militis, do thinke, that aunciently the masse began when the priest did say, The lord be with you, & immediately after, Lift vp your harts, and Let vs giue thankes to our Lord God, and againe, It is very meete, right, and our bounden duty, that wee should at all times and in all places, giue thankes vnto thee holy Father almighty and euerlasting God, through our Lord Iesus Christ. And that thē immediately followed these words. Who the night before hee suffered tooke bread &c. For they thinke, that howsoeuer the latter part of the Roman canon now vsed, ipsissimam prae se serat antiquitatem, & admirabilem spiret sanctitatem, that is, appeares to be aun∣cient and breathing forth nothing but admirable sanctitie, yet the former parts of it do not so; and that they were composed by Scholasticus, not long be∣fore the time of Gregory the first, as himselfe telleth vs. What is to be thought of this Scholasticus, whether hee were a man so named, or whether Gregorie more to expresse vnto us the quality of him that composed the canon, that hee was but a man though a professor of learning, and that therefore he might adde * 1.7 the Lords prayer vnto that forme, that had but a man for the composer of it, I leaue uncertaine, because some thinke it was composed by Gelasius, and that hee was stiled Scholasticus before he was Bishop. But this is certaine, that some things haue beene added to the canon, since the time of Gregory, and that in

the celebration of the holy mysteries, so many tautologismes and barbarismes are found, that ingenuous men abhorre from the celebration thereof, as Platina testifieth, and so many & so grosse corruptions are crept into the service of the Church, that all good men long since and yet still complaine of it. g 1.8 Claudius Elpen•…•…us affirmeth, that the publique services are full of old fables, and al∣lea •…•…geth Petrus abbas Cluniacensis, l. 5. cap. 29. saying, that the songs & himnes of the Church had very many toyes, as namely a himne in the prayse of Saint 〈◊〉〈◊〉; in the which though reading it ouer somewhat hastily, and not stay∣ing to search all, yet he found at the least foure & twenty lies. He alleadgeth likewise Petrus Pictaviensis, epist. 31. reprouing a false & fond himne in the pra•…•…se of Maure running vpon the waters; and Cardinall Cameracensis de re∣•…•… •…•…lesie, consideration the third, advising the councell of Constance to take oder, that vnsound writings might be no longer read in the Church, and the oration of Picus Mirandula to the same purpose; and Volateran com∣playning, that in the daily prayers there are read manifest lies; to whom hee addeth Adrian the sixth afterwards Pope, misliking superstitious forgeries in holy matters, and concludeth, that the Catholickes may lament on the behalfe of the Church, as Hieremie lamented on the behalfe of the Synagogue. Thy Prophets haue seene false & foolish things for thee, & addeth, that the greife which hee doth feele and expresse, for these toyes & dotages, is common to him with all good men for the most part. Bishop h 1.9 Lindan to the same pur∣pose hath these wordes; Quod si nostra conspiceret Agobertus episcopus Lugdu∣•…•…rsis antiphonaria; Deum immortalem! quomodo ea pingeret? vbi non Apochry∣pha modo exevangelio Nicodemi & alijs nugis sunt inserta, sed ipsae adeo secretae pr•…•…es su•…•… mendis turpissimis conspurcatae. That is, If Agobertus sometimes Bishop of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that could not endure the corruptions of his time, were now aliue, and should see our antiphonaries; good God! how would he paint them out? in which not onely apochryphall things out of the gospell of Nicodemus, and such other toyes are •…•…ed, but even the very prayers themselues named secretae, are defiled with •…•…st •…•…rosse and vile absurdities and faults. Many things, sayth Picus Miran∣dula, which in the decrees are accounted apocryphall, and are so censured by Hierome, are in the service of the Church; and many things also that by many are n•…•…t thought to be true. I meane not, sayth i 1.10 Melchior Canus, to defend all the histories which are every where read in the Church, I see there are so ma∣ny of the vulgar sort & condition, not onely amongst those of the laitie but of the clea•…•…gie also, that most willingly embrace those fables, which the Church long since exploded. In this kinde it behooueth the Bishops to doe something; but they must be wise, aswell as diligent, least while they goe about to cure the loosenesse of the skinne about the fingers, they hurt the head. These happilie goe about, to put graue histories into the place of such as are apochryphall, but they change the diuine seruice of the Church so much, that scarce any shew of the old religion seemeth to bee left in the daily prayers: wherefore this must •…•…nd firme, that the histories of the Saints which are wont to bee read in the Church, must not bee despised; though some of them be vncertaine, apochry∣phall, light, and false; for they are credible, and true for the most part, & some of them certaine.

Ferdinand caused it to be proposed to the councell of Trent, amongst other articles of reformation, that the breviaries and missals might be purged, that all things that are found in them not taken out of the Scripture, might be taken away, that the prolixity of prayers & Psalmes might be abridged, good choise being made of such as should be vsed. apud Goldast. imper. const. tom. 2. pag. 3•…•…. These it seemeth are those mysteries of Romish religion, found in the liturgy of the Church, at & before Luthers time, whereof M Brerely speaketh, but they had no generall approbation, but the dislike of all good men, as it ap∣peareth by that which hath bin said. For otherwise the very forme & words of

the liturgie, condemne the abuses of privat masses, & halfe cōmunions, & make nothing of that propitiatory sacrifice, whereof the Papists fable, which are those greatest mysteries of Romish religiō, that they insist vpon in their Masse.

Touching the first of these parts of Romish religion, which is that of their priuate masses, wherein the Priest receiueth alone without any communicants; making the people beleeue that that which he doth is a propitiatorie sacrifice, and that he can apply the benefite of it to whom he will, and that it is enough for them to be present, or to giue something for the procuring of it; their er∣rour is clearely refuted, by the forme of prayers that are vsed in the masse, which show, that they onely haue the benefit that is here sought, that commu∣nicate. For immediatly after the consecration the Priest and people pray in this sort. Supplices te rogamus, omnipotens deus, iube haec perferri per manus sancti angeli tui in sublime altare tuum, in conspectu divinae maiestatis tuae, ut quicunque ex hac altaris participatione sacrosancti filii tui corpus & sanguinem sumpserimus, omni benedictione coelesti & gratiâ repleamur, per eundem Christum Dominum nostrum, Amen. That is, Wee as humble suppliants, beseech thee, O God Almigh∣ty, to commaund that these our sacrifices and oblations, may bee carried by the hands of thy holy Angell, to thy Altar on high, and to the sight of thy divine Maiestic, that so many of vs as shall receiue the sacred body and bloud of thy Sonne, by parta∣king of this Altar, may be filled with all benediction and grace, thorough the same Christ our Lord, Amen. And after the communion they pray againe in this sort graunt Lord that we may receiue with a pure minde, what we haue recei∣ued with the mouth. And againe; Let this communion, O Lord, purge vs from sinne, and make vs partakers of the heauenly remedie. Whereupon Microlo∣gus inferreth, that they must not neglect to communicate, that thinke to haue any benefit by these prayers. These prayers remaine as witnesses of the olde obseruation. k 1.11 Durandus saith, that in the Primitiue Church, all that were pre∣sent at the celebration of the Masse, were wont to communicate euery day, and that to this purpose they did offer a great loafe, that might suffice for the com∣municating of them all: which custome, saith he, the Grecians are said to keepe still. Afterwards when the multitude of beleeuers encreased, and devotion de∣creased, it was ordained, that at least euery Sunday they should communicate. In processe of time, when this could not be kept, there was a * 1.12 third constitu∣tion, that at least thrice euery yeare, each Christian man should communicate, if not oftener. In the end it was ordered, that at the least at Easter euery one should come to the Sacrament; and insteed of the daylie communicating, the Priest gaue daylie the kisse of peace to the minister, saying in some places, take you the bond of peace, and loue, that you may be fit for these sacred mysteries, which were words that were wont to be vsed, when they vsed to salute one a∣nother before the cōmunion, & did import an ensuing cōmunion. l 1.13 The antheme which is named post cōmunio, is so named, because it is sung after the cōmunica∣ting, or in signe that the cōmunion is past. For in the Primitiue Church, all the Faithfull did daylie communicate, and presently after their cōmunicating, this song was sung; that it might appeare the people did giue thanks to God for the body & blood of Christ which they had receiued. m 1.14 Odo Cameracensis saith, that in old times there was no masse celebrated, without some assembly of such, as might offer together with him that celebrateth, & partake with him of the sa∣crament. n 1.15 Generally we may say, saith Durandus, that that is a lawfull masse, at which are present, the Priest, such as answere vnto him, & such as offer & com∣municat. And o 1.16 Walafridus Strabo agreeth with him; saying, that the very forme of the prayers vsed in the masse shew so much, where there is mention expres∣ly made of such as offer & communicate. And the booke of Ecclesiasticall ob∣seruations, intituled Micrologus, written 500 yeares since, saith, it is to bee knowne, that according to the auncient Fathers, onely the communicants were wont to bee present, at the celebration of the sacred mysteries, and that

the catechumens & penitents were all sent out, as not being fit to cōmunicate. Which the very forme of celebrating importeth, in which the priest prayeth not, for his own oblation, & cōmuniō alone, but that of others also; & especially in the praier after the cōmunion, he seemeth to pray only for the cōmunicants. Neither can it properly be said to be a communion, vnlesse diuerse doe partake of the same sacrifice. p 1.17 Chrysostome writing vpon the Ephesians, sayth, that hee that standeth by, and communicateth not, is impudent and shamelesse. And that not only they that sit downe at table, but they that are present at this feast, without their wedding garment, are subiect to a fearefull iudgment. For the master of the feast will not aske, friend how durst thou sit downe, but how durst thou come in not hauing thy wedding garment? thou abidest, thou singest the himme with the rest, thou professest thy selfe worthy, in that thou goest not out with the vnworthy; how darest thou abide and not communicate? They that are in the state of penitencie, are commanded out: if thou bee in thy sinnes, how continuest thou? if thou be vnworthy of the sacramentall partici∣pation, thou art so also of the communion in the praiers. For the spirit descen∣deth, and commeth by them aswell as by the mysteries there proposed. And surely how any can be present, that are not fit at least in desire and in as much as in them is, to communicate, I know not. In old time they communicated e∣very day, or so often that they might seeme to communicate every day, and the holy canons debarre all such as did not communicate from hearing of the masse, as it apeareth De consecr. dist. 2. can. peract. Caietan in 3^am Aquinat: q: 80. art. 12. Yet so did deuotion decay, and abuses grow, that in many places the whole people stayed and were present, yet none but the Clergie alone commu∣nicated; and afterwards, none but the Deacon and subdeacon. Whence it came, that whereas the mysticall breade, was wont to be broken into 3 parts, where∣of the first was for him that celebrated, the 2^• for the Clergy, and the 3^• for the people; q 1.18 in time it was so ordered, that a diuisiō being made into 3 parts he took the one to himselfe, & gaue the other two to the deacon and subdeacon, and in some places did eate all himselfe. Whatsoeuer the neglect or abuses were, r 1.19 it is evident by the composition of the canon, that the mysticall action in which the canon is vsed was publique, & that there were alwaies some present, that offe∣red the sacrifice of praise together with the priest, & participated of the sacra∣ment, as these words do clearely shew. Quotquot ex hac altaris participatione sa∣crosanctum corpus & sanguinem filii tui sumpserimus. Item, prosint nobis domini sa∣cramenta * 1.20 quae sumpsimus. And therefore Iohn Hofmeister, a learned man, expoun∣ding the prayers of the masse hath these words. Res ipsa inquit clamat, tam in Graecâ quàm in Latinâ Ecclesia, non solum sacerdotē sacrificantem, sed & reliquos presbyteros, diaconos, nec non & reliquam plebem, aut saltem plebis aliquam partem, communicasse: quod quomodo cessauerit mirandum est, & vt bonus ille vsus in Ec∣clesiam revocetur, laborandum. that is, The thing it selfe proclaimeth it, that aswell in the Greeke, as Latin Church, not only the priest which sacrificeth, but the other priests, and deacons, also, yea and the people or at least some part of them did commu∣nicate: which good custome how it grew out of vse I know not, but surely we should la∣bour to bring it in againe. That it was not lawfull for the priest to celebrate with∣out the Deacon, who was to receiue the sacrament at his hand t 1.21 Cusanus sheweth by that which is in the missal. Sumpsimus domini sacramēta, we haue receiued the Sacraments of the Lord &c. In the ^• Interim published by the Emperor Charles the fift, in the assembly at Augusta in the 15 of May 1548, we find these words. Atque hic expedierit, cum verissimum illud & singulare sacrificium offertur, vete∣rem Ecclesiae morem reuocare; quo non solum sacrificans ipse, sed & diaconi, & reli∣qui Ecclesiae ministri, qui diebus solennioribus velut testes tāti sacrificii, & necessa∣r•…•…rū ministeriorum coadiutores adhibentur, vt perceptionis corporis & sanguinis do∣mini nostri Iesu Christi participes se preberent, seria canonum sanctione iubebautur; sed & fideles omnes pro recolendà mortis domini & nostrae redemptionis memorià,

ad hoc mediatoris nostri sacrificium confluentes, sedulis exhortationibus monendi & excitandi sunt, vt prius explorati, confessi, & absoluti, sacrosanctae communionis gra∣tiam sumant, & diuinissimae Eucharistiae participationem vnà cum sacerdote sedulo & deuotè frequentent. that is, And here truely it were expedient, that, when that most true and singular sacrifice is offered, wee should renewe the old custome of the Church; by which not only he that celebrateth, but the Deacons also, and the other ministers of the Church, which on the more solemne daies are vsed as witnesses of so solemne an act, & as coadiutors in respect of sundry necessary ministeries, were com∣maunded by a serious sanction of the canons, to be partakers of the sacrament of the Lords body & blood: but all such faithfull & beleeuing men, as resort to this sacri∣fice of our mediator, to renew the memory of the death of our Lord, and our redempti∣on by the same, should be admonished and stirred vp, by effectuall and often exhorta∣tions, hauing examined themselues, confessed their sinnes, and obtained absolution to receiue the grace of the holy communion, and carefully and deuoutly to frequent the participation of the diuine Eucharist together with the priest.

By this which hath been said it appeareth that the priests receiuing alone, & neglecting or excluding the cōmunicating of others as not much necessarie, (his act being availeable to apply the benefits of Christs passion without receiuing the sacrament) is indeed a point of Romish religiō, but not cōtained in the masse; for it is contrary to the name of the masse, the words of the canon, & intendmēt of thē that cōposed it; contrary to the old canons & the practice of the Church; it proceeded frō the indeuotion of the people, or rather the negligence or error of the guides of the Church, that either failed to stirre thē vp to the performāce of such a duty, or made them belieue their act was sufficient, to communicate the benefits of Christs passion to them, not without the dislike of the better sort. So that hitherto no proofe is made, that the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died, was no Protestant Church, but rather the contrary, for this Church did euer protest against this abuse, professed her dislike of the same, & acknowledged that this custome was much different from the auncient.

Honorius in gemma animae, saith, it is reported that anciently the priests were * 1.22 wont to receiue meale of euery house or familie, which custome the Greeks are said to cōtinue still, & that out of this they made the Lords bread which they did offer for the people, & hauing cōsecrated it, distributed it to thē. For euery of thē that offered this meale, were present at the masse, & respectiuely to thē it was said in the canon; & omniū circūstantiū, qui tibi hoc sacrificiū laudis offerūt, that is, cōsider the deuotiō of all that stand roūd about, who offer to thee this sa∣crifice of praise. But after that the Church encreased in number, but decayed in deuotion, it was decreed in respect of carnall men, that they that could, should cōmunicate euery Sunday, or on the chief feast daies, or thrice in the yeare. And now because the people ceasing to cōmunicate, so great a quantity of bread was no longer necessary, it was decreed that it should be formed in fashion of a pen∣nie, & instead of offering meale, they offered euery one a penny, by which they acknowledged Christs being sould for a certain number of pence. These pence were conuerted either to the benefit of the poore, or for prouiding of somthing pertaining to the sacrifice: & in stead of the consecrated bread they were wont to receiue, there was giuen them holy bread as they called it. Whatsoeuer men think of this which Honorius hath of offering meale, y 1.23 it is certaine that in the Primitiue Church, they did offer those things that were to be consecrated in the sacrament; and that the breade that was there consecrated, was vsuall and loafie bread, and in forme * 1.24 round, as it appeareth by z 1.25 Epiphanius in Ancoratu, & a 1.26 Gre∣gory in his dialogues, who calleth the bread of consecration coronas round •…•…aues; all which things shew a Protestant Church.

Wherefore let vs come to the next point of Romish religion, supposed to be contained in the masse, which is the depriuing of the people of the one part of the Sacrament, and the giuing them the same onely in one kind. In the Primitiue Church, saith ^• Lyra, the Sacrament was ministred in both kinds. * 1.27

Dionysius Carthusianus agreeth with him, affirming the same; which thing may * 1.28 be prooued by innumerable testimonies of antiquity. d 1.29 Ignatius saith, there is one bread broken to all, & one cup distributed to all. After the offering is made, let euery one saith Clement, in order take the Lords body and his precious blood, with all reuerent shamefastnes & feare. The bread, saith Dionysius, which * 1.30 was one, is broken in parts, & the cup that is but one, is divided amongst al. Iu∣stin * 1.31 Martyr in his 2 Apologie saith, that after he that is the president hath fini∣shed his thanksgiuing, & the people by a joyfull acclamation haue approoued & consented to the same, the deacons & ministers divide vnto euery one of thē that are present, that each one may partake of that bread, wine, & water, ouer which the blessing & thanksgiuing hath bin powred out, and they doe beare the same to them that are absent. Of whose hand, saith g 1.32 Tertullian (speaking of a faithfull woman married to an Infidell) shall shee receiue, & of whose cup shall she partake? h 1.33 Cyprian in his Epist. to Cornelius, How doe we teach or prouoke them, in & for the confession of Christs name to shed their bloud, if wee deny vnto thē when they are to enter into this warfare, the blood of Christ? or how shall we make them fit for the cup of martyrdome, if wee shall not first admit them to drinke the cup of the Lord, iure communicationis, by the right of com∣municating? & in another place, Therfore they daylie drinke the cup of Christs blood, that they may shed their bloud for Christ. And in a i 1.34 3 place, speaking of a certain child, that had bin polluted in the idols temple, he saith, When as the solemnities were fulfilled, the deacon began to offer the cup to them that were present, & when other had receiued, her course came, but the little girle by the instinct of God, turned away her face, & began to close her mouth with her lips, & to refuse the cup; but the deacon desisted not, but though she resisted, powred into her mouth out of the chalice. And disputing against them that were named Aquarii, he saith, In ministring the cup to the people, contrary to that which Christ did & taught, they giue water insteed of wine; Let them tell vs, saith k 1.35 O∣rigon, what people that is, that vse to drinke bloud. Ambrose: If so often as the bloud of Christ is powred out, it be powred out for the remission of sins, it be∣houeth * 1.36 me alwayes to receiue it, that my sins may be forgiuen me. m 1.37 Laurence the deacon saith, Sixtus the B. cōmitted vnto him the dispensation of the Lords bloud, & made him his consort in consummating the Sacraments. n 1.38 Hierom vpō Sophonie; the Priests which doe serue about the Eucharist, and distribute the bloud of the Lord vnto his people, do wickedly against the Law of Christ when they think that the words, not the life of him that prayeth, make the Eucharist. o 1.39 Augustine, Cùm frangitur hostia, dum sanguis de calice in or a fidelium funditur, quid aliud quam dominici corporis in cruce immolatio, eius{que} sanguinis de latere ef∣fusio designatur? That is, When the hoast is broken, & the bloud powred out of the chalice into the mouthes of the faithfull, what other thing is represented thereby, but the offering of Christs body on the crosse, & the powring of the blood out of his side? ^• Nazianzen, Reverere mysticam mensam ad quam accessisti, panem quem participasti, poculum cui communicasti, passionibus Christi initiatus. Reverence * 1.40 the Lords Table to which thou hast accesse, the bread whereof thou hast beene partaker, the cup in which thou hast communicated, being initiated in the passions of Christ. ^• Cyrill of Hierusalem, Concavâ manu suseipe corpus Christi dicens, Amen. tum verò post communionem corporis Christi accede, & * 1.41 ad calicem illius &c. dicens, Amen. That is, Receiue the body of Christ with a hollow hand, saying, Amen. and after the partaking of the body of Christ, come also to the cup of the Lord, &c, saying, Amen. And r 1.42 Chrysostome most fully to this purpose, It is not now as in the time of the Old testament, where the Priest did eate same things, and the people some other; and where it was not lawfull for the people to partake of those things whereof the Priest did partake; but one body is proposed to all, and one cup. Gregory, His body is there receiued, his flesh is there divided for the saluation of the people, his blood is not now shed vpon the hands * 1.43 of Infidels, but into the mouthes of beleeuers. ^•

Ordo Romanus put forth by Cass∣ander; * 1.44

The Archdeacon taking the challice, confirmeth all thē with the Lords blood, whom the Pope had ceased to communicate in the body of the Lord. And againe; As the Archdeacon doth confirme those that the Pope communi∣cateth in the body of the Lord, so do the other deacons confirme them that the other Bishops or priests communicate. * 1.45 Liber sacramentorū put out by Grego∣ry, prescribeth thus; When the priest giueth the Lords body, let him say, the body of our Lord Iesus Christ keepe thee vnto eternall life, amen. And let him that receiueth say, I will receiue the celestiall bread, & will call on the name of the Lord.

Also whē the priest giueth the cup, let him say; the blood of our Lord

Iesus Christ keep thee vnto eternall life, & let him that receiueth it say, I will receiue the cup of saluation. u 1.46 Beda; The body of Christ is not killed nor his blood shed by the hands of Infidels to their own destruction, but it is receiued by the mouth of beleeuers to saluation.

The 11^t councel of Toledo provideth, that such as through weakenes cannot receiue the whole sacrament, but onely drinke of the mysticall cuppe, shall not for this be separated from the body of

Christ. y 1.47 Charles the great: The mysterie of the Lords body & blood is daily * 1.48 receiued of the faithfull in the sacrament. Rabanus Moguntinus: God would haue the sacraments of his body, and blood, receiued into the mouths of the faithfull, that by the visible worke, the invisible effect might be shewed. Pas∣chasius: * 1.49 It is he only that breaketh this bread, & by the hands of his ministers distributes it to the beleeuers, saying, take yee & drinke yee all of this, aswell * 1.50 ministers as other beleeuers: for this is the cup of my blood of the new & e∣ternall testament. Haimo vpon the 1. Cor. 10. The cup is called a communica∣tion, as it were a participation: because all doe communicate of it, & doe take part of the blood of the Lord which it containeth in it. b 1.51 Rupertus Abbas; The priest distributeth the bread & wine, putting them into the mouthes of the faithfull. c 1.52 Anselm; All we which receiue of one bread & one cup of the Lord, are made one body. d 1.53 Lanfrancus hath the same words that afore we cited out of Augustine. e 1.54 Algerus; Because we liue so by bread & drinke, that we cannot want either of them, Christ would haue them both in his sacrament, least if either were wanting, the signification of life beeing imperfit, hee might bee thought to be imperfit life. Petrus Cluniacensis abbas; The flesh of Christ was given to man to be eaten vnder the forme of bread, & the blood of Christ to be drunke vnder the forme of wine, that as men doe principally vse bread & wine, for the maintaining of this present life: so for the life that is eternall, they might be sed with the body & blood of Christ, here spiritually, & here∣after both spiritually & corporally. In the primitiue Church, saith Caietan, * 1.55 the people did communicate in both kinds, as appeareth in the 1 Cor. 11. This custome continued, not only in the time of persecution, & in the time of the martyrs, whom Cyprian would haue to bee comforted & strengthened with drinking the cup of the Lord, before they came to drinke of the cup of Mar∣tyrdome, but euen in the time of peace also. And therefore we reade not onely of the making & providing of dishes, but of ministeriall chalices, much diffe∣rent from those, wherein they now consecrate, & out of which the priest re∣ceiueth; which were therefore named ministeriall chalices, because they served not to offer, but to minister the bloud of Christ to the people.

In the g 1.56 ponti∣ficall of Damasus in the life of Syluester, we reade, that Constantine builded a Church in the citty of Naples, where hee offered two plates or dishes, and 10 ministeriall chalices weighing euery one of them two pounds. Of this sort was that of blessed Remigius as we find in Hincmarus, in which these verses were,

Hauriat hinc populus vitam de sanguine sacro, &c. That is, let the people draw life out of this sacred blood. Our Fathers, sayth h 1.57 Ioachimus Vadianus, did see, in the greater Church of Sangalli, a chalice guilded with gold, that weighed threescore and tenne markes of siluer, provided no doubt for the publique communion of the people, formerly vsed. i 1.58 Beatus Rhenanus saith,

that Conradus Pellicanus, a man of wonderfull sanctity and learning, did finde

in the first constitution of the Carthusians, that they are forbidden to possesse any vessels of price, besides a siluer chalice, and a pipe, with which the lay people might sucke out the bloud of our Lord. Besides, the booke writ∣ten more then foure hundred yeares since, concerning the treasures of the Church of Mentz, amongst chalices of gold of a greate weight, hauing handles and golden Crosses &c: reckoneth also syluer pipes, six in number, if I be not deceiued, deputed to this vse of sucking out the bloud of our Lord; which I suppose, sayth hee, the Archbishop was wont to vse. Ordo Romanus sheweth, that when the Bishop of Rome doth celebrate, the Archdeacon giueth him to drinke of the holy chalice, and afterwards powreth a little out of the same into a greater chalice or cuppe, which the acoluth doth hold, that the people may be confirmed or receiue the sacrament of the Lords bloud, out of the sa∣cred vessell. For the wine that was not consecrated, being mingled with the blood of Christ is altogether sanctified. The Bishops therefore come in or∣der to receiue of the hande of the Pope, and aftar them all the Priestes come vp, that they may communicate at the alter; and while the Archdeacon com∣municateth, the chiefe Bishop that is present holdeth the challice: for as Bi∣shops attend the Pope in the Church of Rome, so priestes should attend and assist Bishops in other Churches. The Archdeacon after hee hath communi∣cated, receiueth the chalice back againe from the Bishop, and confirmeth all those with the Lords blood, to whom the Pope hath giuen the communion of the body of our Lord. This seruice being performed by the altar, hauing receiued by the Subdeacon the pipe with which the people are to be confir∣med; the Archdeacon deliuereth the chalice to be carried to the acoluth, to be layed vp by him in the vestery. Then doth the pope goe downe, to giue the communion to the Princes of the people, and their wiues; and as the Archdea∣con doth confirme those to whom the Pope giueth the Communion of the Lords body: so do the other Deacons confirme them, to whom (after the Pope hath ministred to those of the better sort) the other Bishops and Priestes do giue the Communion: and as soone as the pope beginneth to minister the Communion to the Clergie, and people, the schoole of singers beginneth to sing the antheme appointed for the Communion; and after that, when the Pope thinketh fit, Glory be to the Father &c.

Here wee see a cloud of witnesses testifying for the Communion in both kinds: wherevpon, ^• Cassander feareth not to pronounce, that hee verily thin∣keth, * 1.59 it cannot be shewed, that the sacrament of the Eucharist was any other∣wise ministred, in any part of the Catholike Church to the faithfull people in the holy assembly from the Lords table, for a thousand yeares and more, but vn∣der both the sacramentall signes of bread and wine. Neither can this saying of Cassander be refuted, by that in the second of the Acts where the faithfull are sayd to haue continued in the breaking of bread and prayer. Nor by that wee reade in antiquity of the Lay communion, which Caietan childishly vrgeth. For sundry worthy diuines in the Roman Church, haue sufficiently shewed the weakenesse of these sillie allegations.

Let vs see therefore how the Communion in one kind came into the Church. It appeareth by l 1.60 Leo the first, that the Manichees, as they denied Christ to haue beene borne in the truth of our flesh, so they denied him to haue truely dyed and risen againe, and therefore they vsed to fast vppon that day, that is to vs the day of saluation and ioy. And whereas to hide their infidelity and heresie, they came sometimes to the Churches of Catholikes, and were present at the celebration of the sacred mysteries, they did so temper the matter, that with vnworthy mouthes they receiued the Lords body, but declined to drinke the blood of our redemption. Leo carefully endeauoured to make this thing knowne to all, that by these signes they might bee discried, that their sacrile∣gious

dissembling might bee found out, and that being discouered, they might by sacerdotall auctoritie be cast out of the society of the Saints. By this of Leo it appeareth, that the Manichees out of an hereticall conceipt, began to com∣municate in one kinde, and that all were wont to communicate in both kindes: that hereby the Manichees might be discouered, and knowne from other right beleeuers, in that they would communicate but in one kinde alone. Which thing also Andradius doth rightly note.

In the m 1.61 time of Gelasius there were certain found, that out of some supersti∣tious conceipt would not communicate in both kindes. Wee haue found, saith Gelasius, that certaine hauing receiued a portion of the sacred Body onely, ab∣staine from the cup of the most holy bloud. Which men because they are saide to be holden with I know not what superstition, either let them receiue the whole Sacrament, or let them be put and kept frrom the whole, seeing there can be no division of one and the same mysterie, without grievous sacriledge.

Thirdly, whereas in case of necessity, as when children, or such as were sicke and weake were to receiue the communion, the auncient did sometimes dippe the mysticall bread into the consecrated wine, and so gaue it vnto them, as it appeareth by the history of Serapion, by that which n 1.62 Cyprian, and o 1.63 Prosper re∣port: and by that which the p 1.64 Councell of Turon prescribeth, that the Eucharist which is reserued for the voyage provision of such as are ready to depart hence, shall be dipped into the blood of the Lord, that so the Priest may true∣ly say. The body and blood of our Lord be beneficiall vnto thee vnto eter∣nall life. q 1.65 Some beganne to bring in this manner of dipping into the ordi∣nary communion, vnder pretence of carefull avoyding the danger of shed∣ding the blood of Christ, and greater reuerence towards the same. For cer∣taine Monkes brought the same custome into their Monasteries, ingenuously confessing that herein they did contrary to the custome of other Churches. But that they were forced so to doe, by the rudenesse of their novices, who they feared would runne into some grosse neglect, if they should receiue the blood of Christ apart; Neither did this custome stay here, but it made an entrance into other Churches abroad also; for r 1.66 Ivo Carnotensis about the yeare 1100, hath these wordes.

Let them not communicate in the bread dipped: but (according to the decree of the Councell of Toledo,) let them commu∣nicate in the bodie apart, and in the blood apart, those onely excepted, to whom it is not prescribed, but permitted to communicate in the bread dip∣ped, out of due consideration of the feare of spilling and shedding the blood of Christ. But this attempt was disliked and resisted: for the authour of the booke intituled s 1.67 Micrologus saith, It is not authenticall that certaine doe dippe the body of the Lord, and hauing so dipped it, giue it to the people, thinking thereby to make vp vnto them the whole communion. But the Roman order is against this, and doth prescribe, that vpon Good friday when they consecrate not, but vse the bread consecrated the day before, they shall take wine that is not consecrated, and consecrate it with the Lords player, and dipping of the Lords body into it, that so the people may receiue the whole Sacrament; which prescription were superfluous, if it were enough to dippe the body of Christ the day before, & so to keep it, & to giue it so dipped to the people to cōmunicate in. Pope Iulius in order of Popes the 36^th, writing to the Bishops of Egypt, doth altogether forbid any such dipping, & commandeth the bread & cup to be receiued apart. What the credit of this Epistle is, which the

authour of this book citeth as the Epistle of Pope Iulius, I know not, neither do I thinke that any such custome of giuing the Sacrament to the people in the Church in such sort, was so ancient as to be reprehended by Pope Iulius. But it appeareth that such dipping when it began to be vsed in the Church, found great opposition; & therfore this supposed constitution of Iulius is renewed, & cōfirmed in the 3^d councel of t 1.68 Bracar. & Micrologus addes, that blessed Gelasius

in order of Popes the 51^th writing to certaine Bishoppes, commandeth them to excommunicate all those, that receiuing the Lords body, abstained from the participation of the cuppe: pronouncing in the same decree, that such diuision of the Sacrament cannot bee without horrible sacriledge. By this of Micrologus it is evident, that they thought in those times, that not onely the communicating in one kind alone, out of such erroneous conceipts as those of the Manichees and other like; but all communicating in one kind alone is sacri∣legious. And that they could not endure the dipping of the sacramentall bread, whereby yet the people did in a sort partake of both kindes. Neither doth Micrologus alone shew the dislike that then was of such dipping, but the like wee may finde in the writings of sundry worthy men. u 1.69 Hildebertus Ceno∣manensis. Hoec ideo tibi, frater, exaravi, vt excitatus evigiles, vt videas quoniam traditioni sacramentorum altaris quae in vestro celebris est monasterio, nec Evan∣gelica traditio consonat, nec decreta concordant. In eo enim consuetudinis est eucha∣ristiam nulli nisi intinctam dare, quod nec ex dominica institutione, nec ex sanctio∣nibus authenticis reperitur assumptum; si Mathaeum, si Marcum, si Lucam con∣sulas, seorsim panem traditum invenies, seorsim vinum, &c: nam intinctum panem aliis praebuisse Christum non legimus, excepto tantummodo illo discipulo, quem in∣tincta buccella proditorem ostenderit; non quod huius sacramenti institutionem

fig∣naret, & sic Papa Iulius ait, &c. That is, Brother I haue therefore written these things vnto thee that being stirred by me, thou mightest bee awakened, to see that the manner of deliuering of the sacrament of the altar which is growne into vse in your monasterie, is neither consonant to the evangelicall tradition, nor agreeing with the decrees. For in your monasterie it is be∣come a custome, to giue the mysticall bread to none but dipped; which will never be found to haue taken beginning from the Lords institution or au∣thenticall constitutions. For if thou consult Mathew, or Marke, or Luke, thou shalt finde that the bread was deliuered apart, and the wine apart, &c. for wee reade not that Christ gaue dipped bread to any other but onely to that disciple, whom by the dipped soppe he meant to shew to be the traitour, and not that he would haue the sacrament so ministred, and so, Pope Iulius sayth, &c.

From the custome of dipping the mysticall bread into the blood, & giving it so dipped vnto the people, for feare of shedding the blood of Christ, if it should haue beene ministred apart, some proceeded farther, and began to teach the people, that seeing the body & blood of Christ cannot be separated, in that they partake of the one, they partake of the other also, and that therefore it is sufficient to receiue in one kinde alone.

But herein they gaue no satisfaction, either to themselues, or others. For though it be true, sayth x 1.70 Durandus, that they are not separated, and that he that receiueth the one receiueth the other also; yet neither part of the sacrament is superfluous, but both are to bee recei∣ued. For whereas wine breedeth blood, wherein the soule & life is seated, ac∣cording to that in Leviticus, The soule of all flesh is in the blood of it, and whereas in the offerings that were of old, the flesh of those beasts that were sacrificed, was offered for the body, and the blood of them for the soule; if wee should receiue Christs body, and together with it the blood vnder the forme of bread signifying and exhibiting the flesh of Christ, and not vnder the forme of wine signifying & exhibiting vnto vs the blood of Christ, wee might bee thought to neglect the saluation and good of our soules. And els-where hee saith, that hee that receiueth onely the consecrated bread, receiueth not the whole & entire Sacrament. For howsoeuer it be true, that the blood of Christ is in the host or consecrated bread: yet is it not there sacramentally, seeing bread doth not signifie the blood but the body of Christ, neither the wine the body but the blood of Christ. And in the former place hee addeth out of Innocentius tertius, that though the blood of Christ be receiued with the bo∣dy,

vnder the forme of bread, and the body with the blood vnder the forme of wine; yet neither can wee drinke the blood of Christ, vnder the forme of bread which wee eat, nor eat the body of Christ, vnder the forme of wine which wee drinke.

And sundry of the Schoolemen agree with him in this poynt, resoluing, that though Christ bee whole, and entire in either part of the sacrament, yet both parts are necessary. First because the exhibiting of the body & blood of Christ distinctly, representeth his passion, in which his blood was separated from his body. And secondly, because in this sorte Christs bo∣dy is more fitly, and significantly exhibited vnto vs in the nature of food, and

his blood of drinke. If this sacrament bee worthily receiued vnder both kinds, sayth y 1.71 Alexander of Hales, there is a greater efficacy and working of grace, causing an vnity betweene the mysticall body & Christ the head; then when it is receiued in one kinde onely. And therefore, he sayth, z 1.72 though the receiuing vnder one kinde bee sufficient, yet that which is vnder both, is of more merit, in that it augmenteth devotion, enlargeth the apprehensi∣on of faith, and is a more compleat, & full receiuing. And againe, a 1.73 The re∣ceiuing vnder both kindes, which manner of receiuing the Lord deliuered, is of more efficacy and complement. And hee that receiueth the sacrament vnder the forme of bread onely, doth not perfectly receiue the same in respect of sacramentall receiuing.

With him agree b 1.74 Albertus magnus. c 1.75 Petrus de Pa∣lude. d 1.76 Bonaventura, and sundry other. By all which it is evident, that though they gaue way to the custome that grew in, and began to prevaile in their time, yet they signified, and sufficiently expressed that in their opinion, the communicating in both kindes, as Christ at first did institute, and the Church for a long time observed, is fitte, convenient, compleat, perfect, of more effi∣cacie, and more cleere representation than the other vnder one kind alone.

And therefore many still retained the auncient manner of communica∣ting, after other had admitted & receiued the new. e 1.77 Aquinas sayth of his time, that the communicating vnder one kinde alone was receiued in many Churches, not in all. f 1.78 Alexander of Hales sayth, that lay men almost euery where communicated in one kinde. g 1.79 Petrus de Palude sayth, it was the cu∣stome in some Churches, to giue the communion to the people in both kinds. Durandus reporteth, that it was the custome of some Churches in his time, that the priest should consecrate such a quantity of wine, that after hee had drunke of the same, there might still some of the sacrament of Christs blood remaine in the chalice, into which more wine not consecrated might be pow∣red, that the other communicants might partake of the blood of Christ. And then they began to dispute the question, whether the wine that was put into the cup, by contact of Christs blood, became consecrated & sacramentall or not. But whether it did or not they resolued, that all by this meanes did par∣take, and drinke of the blood of Christ, which was mingled with euery part of the wine, newly powred into it. After this some proceeded farther, & left none of the sacramentall, or consecrated wine, in the cuppe, or chalice: but powred meere wine into it, that the communicants might wash their mouthes with it, after they had receiued the body of Christ; teaching them that they had beene sufficiently partakers of the blood of Christ, in that they had recei∣ued his body, from which his blood cannot bee separated. But h 1.80 Willielmus de Lauduno sayth, that he that receiueth the body of Christ vnder the forme of bread, receiueth the whole verity,. but not the whole sacrament, and that therefore in many places, they communicated in both kindes. And wee shall finde, that where they admitted the communion vnder one kinde, yet they put a difference betweene the communicants, and permitted some to communi∣cate in both kindes. i 1.81 Linwood sayth, that in the lesser Churches, onely they that consecrate receiue the blood of Christ, vnder the forme of consecrated wine, insinuating thereby, that in the greater it was otherwise: and that with∣in

the compasse of the same nation and people, the greater and more honou∣rable Churches, had the communion in both kindes; when the meaner had it but in one. Yea wee shall finde that in the same particular Church, some communicated in both kindes, when other communicated but in one. For * 1.82 Richardus de mediâ villâ, and Petrus de Tarantasia, afterwards named Inno∣centius the 4^t report, that in their time, not onely the Ministers of the Al∣tar, but the more principall of the people communicated in both kindes. l 1.83 Thomas Waldensis provinciall of the Carmelites here in England, saith of his time.

We permit the Pastours of the Churches to giue the Sacrament in both kindes, to svch persons as are strong in faith, and discreet: as the Bishop of Rome doth vse to giue the communion to the deacon, and other Ministers of the Altar, and other excelling in faith, or of high place and dignity; as Do∣ctours and Kings. Or as the Churches of religious men, and of great pla∣ces, doe still continue to giue the Sacrament to their brethren, and such per∣sons as are worthie of so great a thing. And in m 1.84 another place he hath these words: Neither doe we deny vnto all Lay men generally, to drinke of the blood of Christ vnder the forme of wine; neither doe wee generally, and without distinction, or difference, graunt and yeeld it vnto all, for wee know that by the custome of the Church, it is left to the discretion of the greater Prelates, to admit certaine of the Ministers of the Altar, or certaine other il∣lustrious persons amongst the people, that are faithfull, reverent, and devout, to the solemne communicating in both kindes. Thus did he write, more then

a thousand and foure hundred yeares after Christ, in the time of Pope Martin, who was elected in the Councell of Constance, and who as B. Lindan telleth vs, went home from the Councell of Constance, and ministred the communion to sundry, both of the Clergie, and Laity, vnder both kindes. So that the commu∣nion vnder both kindes continued after the Councell of Constance: which, as the same Lindan saith, did not simply forbid the ministring of the Sacrament in both kindes, but the teaching of the people, that of necessitie it must be so mi∣nistred. To this purpose see the 13^th session of the Councell. The Councell of Basil permitted the Bohemians to continue the vse of the communion in both kinds, & Cassander telleth vs, that good & credible authors do testifie, that in * 1.85 France the whole cōmunion was ministred, though not euery-where, in ordi∣nary Churches, yet in Chappels, euen a little before the memory of our fathers, as also it is ministred to the French Kings to this day. o 1.86 Caietan saith of his time, that the Church of Rome, & almost all the Churches of the west, had the cōmunion in one kind. He saith not all, but almost all; for as it appeareth by the same Caietan, the Cistercian monks in some places did cōmunicate vnder both kinds, euen in his time: their order as it may be thought, being instituted while the communion vnder both kindes continued in generall observation. For o∣therwise it is not to be thought, that any Monasterie would haue presumed, to renew an abolished custome. So that we see, that the Churches of this part of the world, were neuer wholly depriued of the necessarie, and comfortable vse of the Sacrament vnder both kindes. And for those that were, wee see by what degrees, and in what sort, not without complaining of the wrong done vnto them, they were forced to giue way to the innovation, by a prevailing faction. Yet did they not cease to bee members of the true and orthodoxe Church, that were thus wronged. The Armenian in the Dialogues of Armachanus, objecting the saying of Christ, except a man eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his blood, hee can haue no life: to prooue the necessitie of the Communion in both kindes; Armachanus answereth, that if the wordes of Christ bee vnderstood of the Sacramentall drinking, they must bee vnderstood with some qualification, to wit, that it is necessarie to sal∣uation, and the attaining of eternall life, for each man to receiue both at some time, or to bee willing and ready, asmuch as is in his power to

receiue both. Which was no doubt the condition of many thousands, vnder the papacie, that much desired to haue enioyed this comfort, so that in this point wee see, the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died, was a true Pro∣testant Church, as euer before, so at the appearing of Luther.

Which is yet more confirmed, in that after Luthers prcaching, many of the greatest Princes of these parts of the world, that neuer ioyned wholly with him, nor euer brake with the B. of Rome, vrged this point of communicating in both kinds most earnestly; as Ferdinand, Maximilian, the French king, the Duke of Bauaria, and sundry other. p 1.87 There is extanta writing, exibited by the Embassadours of the Emperour Ferdinand, to the councell of Trent in the yeare 1562 Iune 27. Wherein first it is shewed, that the custome of communicating in both kinds, which was in vse in Bohemia, when the councell of Constance was called, hath beene retained there euer since, and that the Bohemians could neuer yet be brought by any perswasions, and entreaties, or by any force, and warre, to relinquish this custome, and to suffer the cuppe to bee denied vnto them. From which cuppe or chalice, that part of the people that maintained this libertie, were called Calixtini, and subutraque; which sort of men spread it selfe exceedingly in that kingdome, and there are of that number many prime men, and certaine great officers and magistrates. To these the Church per∣mitted the free vse of the cup vpon due considerations. But Pius the second vp∣pon some dislike, reuoked the former concession; whose proceedings in that kind hauing no good successe, but rather causing a greater alienation, Paulus the third, and Iulius the third sent their legats, to reconcile them to the Church, and to permit them to vse their former custome. Neither is it to be marvailed at, that these Bohemians, cānot be brought from this perswasion, of the necessity of communicating in both kinds, seeing we find that there are many most lear∣ned, pious, & Catholike men that do thinke, that they that communicate vnder both kinds, obtaine more grace, thē they that communicate vnder one only. Be∣sides these Bohemians, there are in sundry other famous and noble kingdomes & prouinces, certaine pious & Catholique men, as in Hungarie, Austria, Mora∣uia, Silesia, Carinthia, Carniola, Styria, Bauaria, Sueuia, and many Prouinces of Germany, that with great earnestnesse desire the vse of the cuppe to be left free vnto them. Hitherto wee haue heard the words of the Emperour; shewing the desires, of many states and prouinces: and after the vrging of the daungers that may follow, if their desires be not satisfied, the Embassadours earnestly desired the Bishops assembled, to consider of this motion. The same desire of the Emperour Ferdinand is excellently q 1.88 expressed, in an oration made by An∣draeas Dudithius the Emperours Embassadour in the councell of Trent. r 1.89 Maxi∣milian in his rescript to Pius the fourth touching the marriage of priests, she∣weth that in his opinion it is fitte, not only to gratifie the people by the con∣cession of the cuppe, as he saith Pius had already yeelded to doe, but the Cler∣gie also by granting them the liberty of marriage. * 1.90 There is extant also an ora∣tion made by the Embassador of the Duke of Banaria in the councell of Trent in the yeare 1562: wherein we finde these words. Not a few are offended & fall away, & ioyne themselues to the sectaries, by reason of the prohibition of the communion vnder both kinds. For they think there is an expresse word of God, for the communion vnder both kinds, and no word for the other vnder one. To which they adde, that the vse of the cōmunion in both kinds was not only in the time of the Primitiue Church, but is now also in the Easterne Churches of the world: and that the Roman Church aunciently did not abhorre from the same, as it appeareth by many hystories. Neither doth it moue men a little especially in Bauaria, that Paul the third by his bull granted the communi∣on vnder both kindes to certaine Bishops in Germanie. s 1.91 The same Duke in an Epistle written to Pius the fourth in the yeare 1564 concerning the same mat∣ter, hath these words. Wee haue conferred touching this thing, which the

most reuerend and illustrious Arch-chauncelours and electours spirituall of the Roman Empire, and they agree with mee to beseech your holinesse helpe, for the confirming of them that stand, and the raising vp of them that are fallen, as being the supreame Monarch in respect of things pertayning to Christianity; so that you neede not to make any doubt of the willingnesse of the electours, if your holines shall bee pleased to yeeld any thing in this kind, to embrace the same, and to put it in execution. Wherefore together with the Emperours majestic, I humbly & most earnestly beseech your holines, to graunt the free vse of the cup, at the least to them who being perswaded as they are, will har∣ken to no better aduise at this time. t 1.92 Thuanus reporteth, that Maximilian in the very beginning of his raigne, when he saw that men were exceedingly discontented, especially in Bohemia, & Austria, that they had no satisfaction given them by the councell of Trent, as they expected, touching the concessi∣on of the cup, and the freedome of priests marriages, that he might bring them to be better content, and that they might bee willing to doe what he expected of them, for the good of the common-wealth, hee was earnest with the Pope, that the promises which he might well remember hee had made to Ferdinand, & to himselfe, by Cardinall Moronus, a litle before the councell ended, might now be made good, in a time wherein it was so needfull: seeing the councell determining nothing, had left power to him, to take order in this kinde. The Pope denyed not to performe what the Emperour desired, being perswaded so to doe by Moronus, and not beeing much averse from it of himselfe before. But Philip King of Spaine, by the instigation of Cardinall Pacecus, fearing this example in the Low-countries, sent Peter Avila to Rome, at the same time that he vnderstood, the Emperour would send his embassadours, to disswade the Pope, from listening to any such motion, as beeing very hurtfull to the Christian Church, &c. The Pope at the instance of the Cardinalls, deferring & putting off the matter till a longer time, for the present eluded the Empe∣rours petition. Thus did this good Emperour insist in the steppes of Ferdi∣nand his worthy father, ^• who when he was moved by the Pope, to cause the * 1.93 councell of Trent to bee promulgated in Germany shewed himselfe willing to doe any thing that was fitte, but earnestly vrged the Pope to permit & leaue free the vse of the cup to the lay people, being moved so to doe by Charles the Archduke his sonne, & the Duke of Bavaria his son in law, and the due consi∣deration of the necessity of his subiects. x 1.94 There are extant certaine articles concerning reformation of manners & Church discipline, proposed in the councell of Trent, by the embassadours of Charles the ninth the French King; amongst which the 18 article is, that the auncient decree, of Leo and Gelasi∣us, touching the communion vnder both kindes, might be reviued, & brought to be in vse againe. But when the French perceiued, that there were scarce a∣ny footesteps, of the libertie of auncient councells to be discerned, in the coun∣cell of Trent; that all things were swayed, and disposed by the absolute com∣maund of Pius the fourth then Pope; the embassadours were commaunded to make a protestation, in the name of the King their master, the words of which protestation are these.

Wee refuse to bee subject to the commaund, & dis∣position of Pius the fourth. Wee reiect, wee refuse, & contemne all the judg∣ments, censures, & decrees of the same Pius. And although most holy Fa∣thers, your religion, life, and learning, was ever, and euer shall bee of great esteeme with vs, yet seeing indeed you doe nothing, but all things are done at Rome, rather then at Trent, and the things that are here published, are rather the deerees of Pius the fourth, then of the councell of Trent, wee denounce, & protest here before you all, that whatsoeuer things are decreed, & pub∣lished in this assembly, by the meere will & pleasure of Pius, neither the most Christian King will euer approue, nor the French Church euer acknowledge, to be the decrees of a generall councell. Besides this, the King our master

commaundeth all his Arch-Bishops, Bishops, and Abbots, to leaue this as∣sembly, and presently to depart hence; then to returne againe, when there shall be hope of better, & more orderly proceedings.

Wherefore from this point of Romish Religion touching the communion in one kinde, which findeth no helpe in the publique liturgie vsed in the dayes of our Fathers, by which it is evident that the people were wont to cōmuni∣cate in both kindes, when that forme of divine seruice was first composed, nor no liking or approbation of the best and worthiest guides of Gods Church then liuing: let vs come to the next, which is the propitiatory sacrifice for the quicke and the dead. This indeede is a grand point of Romish Religion, and if M Brerelie can prooue that it is contained in the publique Liturgie, that was vsed in the Church, at, and immediatly before Luthers appearing, and consequently, that all that vsed that Liturgie had such an opinion of a sacrifice, hee hath said much to proue, that the Church vnder the Papacie, was no Protestant Church; but this neither hee, nor all the most learned Papists in the world will euer be able to proue. First therefore, I will make it appeare, that the Canon of the Masse, importeth no such sacrifice. And secondly, I will shew at large, that neither before nor after Luthers appearing, the Church beleeued, or knew any such, new, reall sacrificing of Christ, as is now ima∣gined.

Touching the canon of the Masse, it is true that therein there is often menti∣on of sacrifice and oblation: but Luther professeth, that the words may be vn∣derstood in such a sense, as is not to be disliked, and hee saith, hee could so ex∣pound it, and that somewhere hee hath so expounded it; but seeing it is ob∣seure, and may beare diuers senses, and a better, and more cleare forme of di∣vine celebration may be brought in, he will not honour it so much, as to giue it that sense which it may well carry, and in which the first composers of it, and others after did vse it, but that wherein they of Rome will now needes haue it to be vnderstood. That the forme of words vsed in the canon, are obscure in sundry parts of it, and hard to bee vnderstood, euen by the learned, y 1.95 Cassander confesseth, and therefore thinketh it fit it were explained & illustrated by some briefe scholies put in the margent, or inserted into the text by way of paren∣thesis. The obscuritie that is in it, groweth, as he rightly obserueth, partly out of the disuse, & discontinuing of certaine old obseruations, to which the words of the canon composed long since haue a reference, and partly from the vsing of the word sacrifice, in diuers and different senses, though all connexed: & the sudden passing from the vsing of it in one sense, to the vsing of it in another. It is not vnknowne to them that are learned, that in the Primitiue Church the people were wont to offer bread & wine, and that out of that which they offe∣red, a part was consecrated to become vnto them the Sacrament of the Lords body & bloud, & other parts converted to other good & holy vses. Respectiue∣ly to this ancient custome are those prayers conceiued, that are named secretae; & the first part of the canon, wherein wee desire that God will accept those gifts, presents, offerings, and sacrifices which we bring vnto him, and that hee will make them to become vnto vs, the body & bloud of his Son Christ, which onely are that sacrifice, that procureth the remission of our sins, and our recon∣ciliation and acceptation with God. So that to take away this obscurity, & that the words may haue a true sense, the ancient custome must bee brought backe againe; or at least it must be conceiued that the elements of bread & wine that are set vpon the mysticall table, & are to be consecrated, are brought thither, and offered in the name of the people, and that as being their presents, they are symboles of that inward sacrifice whereby they dedicate and giue themselues and all that they haue vnto God. Touching the second cause of the obscurity of the wordes of the Canon, which is the vsing of the word sacrifice and •…•…ffering, in so manifold and different senses, and the sudden passing from the

one of them to the other; wee must obserue; that by the name of sacrifice, gift, or present, first the oblation of the people is meant, that consisteth in bread, and wine, brought and set vpon the Lords table. In which againe 2 things are to be considered: the outward action; and that which is signified thereby, to wit the peoples dedicating of themselues, and all that they haue, to God by faith, and deuotion, & offering to him the sacrifice of praise. In this sense is the word sacrifice vsed, in the former part of the canon, as I haue already shewed. In re∣spect of this is that prayer powred out to God, that he will be mindfull of his seruants that doe offer vnto him this sacrifice of praise, that is, these outward things in acknowledgement, that all is of him, that they had perished if he had not sent his sonne to redeeme them, that vnlesse they eate the flesh, and drink the blood of Christ, they haue no life; that he hath instituted holy Sacraments of his body and blood, under the formes of bread and wine, in which he will not onely represent, but exhibit the same vnto all such as hunger and thirst after righteousnesse; and therefore they desire him so to accept and sanctifie these their oblations, of breade and wine, which in this sort they offer vnto him, that they may become vnto them the body, and blood of Christ, that soe par∣taking in them, they may bee made partakers of Christ, and all the benefits of redemption, and saluation, that hee hath wrought. Secondly, by the name of sacrifice is vnderstood, the sacrifice of Christs body; wherein wee must first consider the thing offered, and secondly the manner of offering. The thing that is offered is the body of Christ, which is an eternall, and perpetuall, pro∣pitiatory sacrifice, in that it was once offered by death vpon the crosse, and hath an euerlasting, and neuer failing force, and efficacie. Touching the manner of offering Christs body and blood, wee must consider, that there is a double offering of a thing to God. First soe as men are wont to doe, that giue something to God out of that they possesse, professing that they will no lon∣ger be owners of it, but that it shall be his and serue for such vses, and imploy∣ments as hee shall conuert it too. Secondly, a man may bee sayd to offer a thing vnto GOD, in that he bringeth it to his presence, setteth it before his eyes, and offereth it to his view, to incline him to doe something, by the sight of it and respect had to it. In this sort Christ offereth himselfe and his body once crucified, dayly in heauen, and soe intercedeth for vs; not as giuing it in the nature of a gift, or present, for hee gaue himselfe to God once, to be holy vnto him for euer; nor in the nature of a sacrifice, for hee dyed once for sinne, and rose againe neuer to die any more: but in that hee setteth it before the eyes of GOD his Father, representing it vnto him, and soe offering it to his view, to obtaine grace, and mercie for vs. And in this sort wee also offer him dayly on the altar, in that commemorating his death, and liuely representing his bitter passions, endured in his body vpon the crosse, wee offer him that was once crucified, and sacrificed for vs on the crosse, and all his sufferings, to the view and gracious consideration of the Almighty, earnestly desiring, and assuredly hoping, that hee will encline to pitty vs, and shew mercie vnto vs, for this his dearest sonnes sake, who in our nature for vs, to satisfie his displeasure, and to procure vs accep∣tation, endured such and soe grieuous things. This kind of offering, or sacrificing Christ, commemoratiuely, is twofold, inward, and outward. Outward, as the taking, breaking, and distributing the mysticall bread, and powering out the cuppe of blessing, which is the Communion of the blood of Christ. The inward consisteth, in the faith, and deuotion of the Church, & people of God, so commemorating the death and passion of Christ, their crucified Sauiour, and representing and setting it before the eyes of the Almighty, that they flye vnto it as their only stay and refuge, and beseech him to be mercifull vnto them for his sake, that endured all these things, to satisfie his wrath, & worke their peace & good. And in this sense, and answerable here∣vnto

that is, which wee finde in the canon, where the Church desireth Al∣mighty God, to accept those oblations of bread and wine, which shee presen∣teth vnto him, & to make them to become vnto the faithfull communicants, the body & bloud of Christ, who the night before he was betraied tooke bread into his sacred hands, lifted vp his eyes to heauen, gaue thankes, blessed it, & gaue it to his disciples; saying, take and eate yee all of this, for this is my body. And in like manner after hee had supped, tooke the cuppe and gaue thankes, blessed it and gaue it to his disciples: saying, drinke yee all of this, for this is the new Testament in my bloud: doe this as oft as you shall drinke it, in remem∣brance of mee. And then proceedeth and speaketh vnto Almighty GOD in this sort. Wherefore o Lord wee thy seruants, and thy holy people, mindfull of that most blessed passion of the same CHRIST thy sonne our Lord, as also of his resurrection from the dead, and his glorious ascension into heauen, doe offer to thy diuine maiestie, out of thine owne gifts conse∣crated, and by mysticall blessing made vnto vs, the body and bloud of thy sonne Christ, a pure sacrifice, a holy sacrifice, and an vndefiled sacrifice: the holie bread of eternall life, and the cuppe of euerlasting saluation, that is, wee of∣fer to thy view, and sette before thine eyes, the crucified body of Christ thy sonne, which is here present in mystery, and sacrament, and the blood which hee once shedde for our sakes, which wee know to be that pure, holy, vndefiled, and eternall sacrifice, wherewith onely thou art pleased, desi∣ring thee to bee mercifull vnto vs, for the merit and worthinesse thereof, and soe to looke vpon the same sacrifice, which representatiuely wee offer to thy viewe, as to accept it for a full discharge of vs from our sinnes, and a perfect propitiation: that soe thou mayest behold vs, with a pleased, cheerefull, and gratious countinance. This is the meaning of that prayer in the canon: supra quae propitio & sereno vultu respicere digneris &c. as the best interpreters of the canon doe tell vs. z 1.96 And when in the same prayer, wee desire that this sacrifice may be accepted for vs, as the sacrifices of Abell, Abraham, and Melchisedec were, they obserue that this compa∣rison, must not be vnderstood in quantitie, but in similitude onely. For the thing it selfe, is infinitely better then the figure; and the sacrifice that CHRIST offered, and wee here commemorate, is incomparablie more excellent, then those of Abell, Abraham, and Melchisedec. And that therefore the meaning of those words is. That as God accepted those sacrifices which his seruants offered vnto him, before the comming of CHRIST his sonne, as prefigurations of that sacrifice which he was after∣wards to offer, and as a profession of their hope, of remission of sinnes by the same; soe it will please him, to accept the sacrifice which CHRIST once offered, and wee now commemorate, for vs; and vs for it: That soe our sinnes may be remitted, and wee receiued to fauour. After this there followeth another prayer in the canon, wherein as humble suppliants, they that come to celebrate, and to communicate, beseech Almighty God to commaund the oblations which they offer to be carried by the hands of his holy Angell, vnto his altar that is on high, and into the view, and sight of his diuine Maiestie; that soe many as shall by partaking of the altar re∣ceiue the sacred body and bloud of his sonne, may bee filled vvith all heauenly benediction and grace thorough the same Lord IESVS CHRIST. This forme of prayer wee finde to haue beene verie aun∣cient, but what the meaning of it is, it is not soe easie to finde out. For how may wee bee vnderstood to desire, that the body of CHRIST which we represent vnto GOD, in this commemoratiue sacrifice, should bee car∣ried into heauen, seeing it is alwaies there? Wherefore let vs heare what the holy Fathers haue sayd to this purpose. Quis fidelium haberet dubi∣um, sayth Saint Gregorie, in ipsâ immolationis hora, ad vocem sacerdotis

coelos aperiri, in illo Iesu Cristi mysterio Angelorum choros adesse, summis in a sociari, terrena coelestibus iungi, vnum quid ex visibilibus, & invisibilibus fieri?

That is, What faithfull man or beleeuer will euer make any doubt, but that in the houre of the oblation, the Heauens are opened; that so soone as the voyce of the Priest is heard, Quires of Angels are present, the lowest and highest things enter into a societie, earthly things are joyned with those that are celestiall, and things visible, and invisible become one. And in another place: At one and the same time and moment that which is presented on the al∣tar, is caught vp into Heauen, by the ministerie of Angels, to bee ioyned in a neere sort vnto the body of Christ, and is at the same time before the eyes of the Priest vpon the altar. So then the oblations which we present vnto God on

the Altar, are then carried by the hands of Angels, into Heauen, when those sa∣cramentall elements which we bring thither, though they be still visible on the altar, as Gregory saith, yet being changed, and become vnto vs in mysterie, and exhibitiue signification, the body and bloud of Christ, once sacrificed and shed for vs: and now in heauen continually represented vnto God to intercede for vs; may rightly be said to bee carried vp into heauen. But seeing by the pre∣cedent wordes of mysticall blessing and prayer, the sacramentall Elements are so chaunged before the pronouncing of this prayer, that they are already be∣come in sort before expressed, the body and bloud of Christ, which is in heauen, wee doe not in these wordes desire any such thing to bee done, but this is that wee say, Lord wee heere commemorate the death and sacrifice of thy Sonne Christ, that once died for vs, and now continually representeth the same his death vnto thee, to procure vs good, humbly beseeching thee, that for his sake thus dying for vs, & now continually in heauen representing himselfe vnto thee, & setting the same his passions and sufferings before the eyes of thy Diuine Maiesty, as if euen now he did hang on the Crosse, all euill may bee farre remoued from vs, & all good brought vpon vs. And that all we that by commu∣nicating in these holy mysteries, receiue the body & bloud of the same thy Son Christ, may be filled with all heauenly benediction and grace. So that to com∣maund the sacrifice of Christs body and bloud once offered, & here by vs com∣memorated, to be carried into heauen, and to bee represented vnto God, is no more but to make it appeare, that that body of Christ which hee once of∣fered by the passion of death, and which we now commemorate, is in Heauen, there so represented vnto God, that it procureth for vs all that wee desire.

There is nothing therefore found in the Canon of the Masse rightly vnder∣stood, that maketh any thing, for the new reall offering of Christ to God his Fa∣ther, as a propitiatorie sacrifice to take away sinnes, neither did the Church of God, at, & before Luthers time, know or beleeue any such thing, though there were some in the midst of her, that so conceiued of this mystery, as the Roma∣nists now do. Wherfore for the clearing of this point I will first set down what the conceipt of the Romanists now is, & then make it appeare, that all the best learned, at, and before Luthers time, thought otherwise touching this matter then these now doe.

These that now are, expresse their conceipt touching this point in this sort. First they shew what an oblation is. Secondly, what the nature of a sacri∣fice is. And thirdly how and in what sort they imagine, Christ is now newly, & really, not offered onely, but sacrificed also to take away our sinnes. An ob∣lation they rightly define to bee, the bringing of some thing that we haue into the place where the name of God is called on, and where his honour dwelleth; a representing of it there vnto God, a professing that wee will owne it no lon∣ger, but that God shall bee the owner of it, that it shall bee holy vnto him, to bee imployed about his seruice, if it bee an irrationall thing; or to serue him in some speciall sort, if it bee rationall, as when parents presen∣ted and offered their children to God, to bee holy vnto him as were the

Nazarits, who were to serue him in some peculiar and speciall sort: and in this sort Christ presented, and gaue himselfe to God his father, from his first entrance into this world, and was holy vnto him, and an oblation. But in this sort it is not for vs to offer Christ to God his father, whatsoeuer any Papist may imagine. For it were a wofull thing for vs so to giue vp Christ to his father, as to professe that wee will owne him no longer, nor haue any interest in him, nor claime to him, any more. And besides, if it were fit for vs so to doe, yet who are wee that wee should present Christ vnto God his father, to bee holy vnto him? that so presented and gaue himselfe vnto him, from his first entrance into the world, that hee bringeth vs also to God, to bee ho∣ly vnto him. A sacrifice implyeth more than an oblation. For if wee will sacrifice a thing vnto God, wee must not onely present it vnto him, professing that it shall bee his, and that wee will owne it no more, nor make any claime vnto it; but wee must destroy, and consume it also. As wee see in the old law, when liuing things were sacrificed, they were slaine and consumed in fire; when other that had no life were sacrificed, they were consumed in fire. And answerably herevnto, Christ was sacrificed on the crosse, when hee was crucified, and cruelly put to death by the Iewes. But how he should now bee really sacrificed, sacrificing implying in it a destruction of the thing sacrificed, it is very hard to conceiue. First therefore they say, that Christ may truely bee said to bee really sacrificed; because when the words of consecration, are pronounced ouer the bread, they so cause the body of Christ to bee, where the bread was, that they cause not the presence of the blood; and in like sort the words, pronounced ouer the wine, cause the pre∣sence of Christs blood, and not of his body, so that vpon the pronouncing of the words of consecration; there would bee in the sacrament the body of Christ without the blood, and the blood without the bodie, and so a slaine, and a crucified Christ, if that naturall concomitance, by reason where∣of the one of them will not bee absent, where the other becommeth present, did not hinder their being asunder. Thus then they say, there is a true reall sacrificing of Christ, in that, as much as is on the part of the words pronoun∣ced, and him that pronounceth them, Christs bloud is againe powred out, and hee consequently slaine. This is the conceipt of Gregorius de Valen∣tia: and in this sorte hee imagineth Christ is daily, newly sacrificed on the altar: But (besides that it is an impious thing, for the priest to endea∣uour as much as in him lies to slay Christ, and to powre out his bloud a∣gaine) this proueth not a reall sacrificing of Christ, but onely an indevour so to doe. For his bloud is not powred out, neither is hee slaine indeede. So that as in the time of the old law, if the priest reaching forth his hand, to slay the beast that was brought to bee sacrificed, had beene so hindred by something interposing it selfe, that hee could not slay the same, hee had offered no sacrifice, but endeavoured onely so to doe; so is it here. Bellar∣mine therefore reiecteth this conceipt, and hath another of his owne. For hee sayth, that Christ hath a two fold beeing: the one naturall, the other sacra∣mentall. The Iewes had him present amongst them visibly, in his naturall being; this beeing they destroyed, and so killed, and sacrificed him. The Romish Priests haue him not so present, neither can they destroy his naturall beeing, and so kill him; but they haue him present in a sacramentall presence, and in a sacramentall being, this beeing they destroy. For consuming the accidents of bread and wine, which are there left without substance, and with which hee is present, they make his presence there to cease, and so cause him to loose that beeing, which formerly hee there had. Thus doe they suppose that they newly sacrifice Christ, and destroy him in that be∣ing, wherein hee is present with them, And the Priests eating, is not

for refection, but for consumption, that hee may destroy Christ in that beeing, wherein hee is present; as the fire on the altar, was wont to con∣sume, and destroy the bodies of those beasts, that were put into it. But first it is impious to thinke of destroying CHRIST in any sort. For though it bee true, that in sacrificing of Christ on the altar of the crosse, the destroying and killing of him was implyed, and this his death was the life of the world; yet all that concurred to the killing of him: as the Iewes, the Roman souldiers, Pilate and Iudas, sinned damnably, and soe had done, though they had shed his bloud, with an intention, and desire, that by it the world might be redeemed. Soe in like sort, let the Romish priestes haue what intention they will, it is hellish and damnable, once to thinke of the destroying of Christ in any sort. And besides, if it were lawfull for them so to doe, yet all that they doe, or can doe, is not sufficient to make good a re∣all sacrificing of CHRIST. Because all they doe, or can doe, is noe destroying of his beeing, but onely of his being somewhere, that is, in the Sacrament. For as if the things which were brought to be sacrificed in the time of the Law, had beene only remoued out of some place, into which they were brought, or onely caused to cease to bee, where they were, and not what they were; they could not truly haue beene sayd to haue beene sacrificed: no more can it be truly said, that Christ is really sacrificed, in that the priests consuming the accidents of bread and wine, vnder which they supposed him to be, make him cease to be there any longer.

Hauing thus in their erring imaginations framed to themselues a reall sacrificing of Christ, they beginne to dispute of the force and efficacie of it affirming that this reall offering, and sacrificing of CHRIST by the * 1.97 priest, is propitiatorie in that it pacifieth God, and procureth and obtaineth grace, and the gift of repentance, that the sinner may come to the sacra∣ment, and so be iustified: satisfactorie, in that it applyeth the satisfaction of Christ, and procureth remission of temporall punishments, to them that by faith and repentance are alreadie free, from the guilt of eternall condem∣nation; meritorious, because it obtaineth that grace, whereby wee may merit; and impetratory, in that it obtaineth for vs, and procureth to vs, all desired good. This force and efficacie they say it hath, ex opere operato, that is, the verie offering and sacrificing of Christ in sort before expressed, of it selfe hath force and power, to obtaine and procure grace, remission of sinnes, and the like, for all them for whom such offering is made; if there bee no hinderance or impediment in themselues. And that God hath tyed himselfe by promise, to conferre such gifts, and worke such effects, soe often as the body and bloud of his sonne shall bee thus offer∣ed. And farther they adde, that it conferreth good and remoueth euill, not infinitely, but in a stinted and limited sort. Nor in that li∣mited sort equally in respect of all, but in proportionable sort, as the intendment of the Church is to apply this sacrifice more or lesse, to the procuring of more or lesse. And that therefore the benefitte that this sacrifice procureth, is in one degree communicated to all faithfull ones liuing and dead; in another to such, as by the Churches appointment are specially named, as the Pope, King, and Bishoppe or the like; in another to them that procure the offering of this sacrifice: in an∣other to them that are present and stand by: in another to them that minister and attend; in another to the priest that sacrificeth: and in another to whomsoeuer it pleaseth the priest, to impart and communicate the bene∣fitte and effect of this sacrifice. For as Gregorius de Valentia alleadgeth out of ^• Scotus, it is to be thought, that the priest that is the minister of this sacrifice, may apply to whom hee will, not only that which by worth * 1.98 of his personall merit, in the religious performing of this seruice hee

may deserue, but some part also of that effect which this sacrifice hath ex opere operato: and that God hath committed vnto him the effect which it hath in this kinde, in some degree and sort, to bee dispensed by him to whom hee thinketh good, in recompence of his seruice. And further they resolue, that those ef∣fects which this sacrifice hath ex opere operato, and are by the intendment of the Church, communicated in different sort, and degree, to those diuers sorts of men before specified, are equally communicated to each of those sorts, ac∣cording to their seuerall differences, whether the sacrifice be offered for more or fewer. As they that procure Masse to be said for them, whether they bee more or fewer, shall haue like effects wrought in them. But that portion of this efficacie, force, and power of working gratious effects, that is committed to the disposition, and distribution of the Priest, is so limited, that accordingly as he intendeth good, to more, or fewer, he procureth more, or lesse vnto them. Heere wee see a goodly frame of building raised, but it hath an ill foundati∣on, for it is most absurd to say, that the very offering of Christs body and bloud, ex opere operato, and of it selfe, should haue force to obtaine any thing at Gods hand, or to procu•…•…e any good vnto vs. For there is no offering that can haue any acceptation vnlesse it bee offered by an accepted offerer, accor∣ding to that in the 4^• of Gen•…•…sis, God had respect to Abel and to his offering; first to Abel, and then to his offering; and that in the 21^th of Luke, where Christ saith; this poore widdow hath cast in more into the treasurie then any of the rest; because shee cast it in, out of a larger, more free, better, and more accepted will. And heereupon Saint Gregory, in his Homilie on that of Mathew 4. Iesus walking, &c. saith, non pensat Deus quantum in eius sacrificio deferatur, sed ex quanto: that is, God doth not so much weigh and consider how much, or how good that is which is presented to him in sacrifice, as out of how great and good affection it is presented. And therefore if a Iew had offered Christ vnto his father, willing so to bee of∣fered, or not willing, this oblation had not beene so acceptable, as when hee offered himselfe: nay it had not beene accepted at all, according to

that in c 1.99 Ecclesiasticus, Hee that offereth sacrifice out of the substance of the poore, is as hee that slayeth, and sacrificeth the sonne in the sight of his father. And Bellarmine saith well to the same purpose, that though

* 1.100 the thing offered bee acceptable of it selfe, yet the oblation is not acceptable, vnlesse the offerer be accepted, which is especially true in respect of God, whose all things are, and who needeth nothing. So that in this suppo∣sed sacrifice, the worthinesse and acceptation of the offerer, is principally to bee considered, for it is not so much the worth of the thing offered, as the esteeme the offerer hath of it, and his good affection in offering it, that God respecteth. Who therefore is the offerer of this their supposed sa∣crifice? They will say, Christ is the supreme, and the Priest the inferi∣our, and subordinate: and that therefore whatsoeuer the condition of the Priest bee, the sacrifice is accepted for the principall offerers sake. But this is nothing, for though Christ bee offered on the Altar, as they ima∣gine, yet hee doth not offer himselfe immediately. For then this offering would bee equivalent to that former on the Crosse, which yet they will not acknowledge. And besides, that of the Apostle should be found false and vn∣true, Heb. 9. that hee doth not often offer himselfe. Neither can it be saide, that Christ offereth himselfe mediatly by the Priest, and so giueth price and worth to the offering. For if it be said that Christ offereth himselfe medi∣atly by the Priest, either it is because hee appointeth, authoriseth, and encou∣rageth the Priest to make this offering, and this will giue no more value and worth to the offering then the immediate offerer hath, as wee see it was in the offerings of the Priest vnder the Law: or else in that the Priest doth this in his name, as a Legate presents a thing to a forraine Prince,

in the name of the King; and this cannot bee; for whatsoeuer a legat may doe, in the name & person of his king, the king may doe in his owne person, if it please him; but Christ can no more offer himselfe in his owne person, therefore this is not to be admitted. Wherefore passing by this idle phancie, wee shall finde, that the of•…•…erer is the priest, and so many as doe procure, or desire the doing of the same; and that therefore the whole Church in a sort, may be said to offer this sacrifice. For though it be offered ministerio sacerdotis, by the ministery of the Priest, yet it is offered voto ecclesiae, out of the devotion & de∣sire of the Church, in which there are ever some found, that are acceptable vnto God; and therefore the offerer of this sacrifice is euer acceptable: and ac∣cording to the merit, & worthinesse of this offerer, the sacrifice here offered findeth acceptation. So then these men imagine, that there is a reall, exter∣nall sacrifice in the Church, which they daily offer vnto God; that it worketh great effects of grace; that Christ is offered in it; but that the acceptation of it, is not wholy, nor principally from the dignity of the thing offered, but from the merit of the offerer.

This is the present doctrine of the Roman Church: but this was not the do∣ctrine of the Church at the time of Luthers appearing: for the best & princi∣pall men that then liued, taught peremptorily, that Christ is not newly offe∣red any otherwise, then in that hee is offered to the view of God; nor any o∣therwise sacrificed, then in that his sacrifice on the crosse, is commemorated & represented.

The things that are offered in the sacrament are two (sayth the authour of the Enchiridion of Christian religion, published in the pro∣vinciall councell of Colen:) the true body of Christ with all his merits, & his mysticall body, with all the gifts which it hath receiued of God. In that therefore the Church doth offer, the true body & blood of Christ to God the father, it is meerely a representatiue sacrifice, & all that is done, is but the commemorating, & representing of that sacrifice, which was once offered on the crosse. But in that it dedicateth itselfe, which is the mysticall body of Christ vnto God, it is a true, but a spirituall sacrifice, that is, an eucharisti∣call sacrifice of praise, thanksgiuing, & of obedience due vnto God. Christ therefore is offered & sacrificed on the altar, but sacramentally & mystically: in that in the sacrament there is a commemoration & remembrance of that which was once done. Christ is not often slaine, which once to thinke were abominable; but that which was once done is represented, that wee might not forget the benefit bestowed on vs, but rather be so stirred vp & moued by this sacrament, as if wee saw the Lord Iesus hanging vpon the crosse. The passion of the Lord, sayth e 1.101 Cyprian, is the sacrifice that wee offer to God, that is, that wee offer to the view of God, and represent vnto him. f 1.102 Neither is it to be marvailed at, that we offer the true body of Christ, to reviue the memory of the former sacrifice, and to represent it vnto God: seeing the son of God was giuen vnto vs, that wee might oppose him to the wrath of God, as a reconciler, and that distrusting our owne strength, wee might represent to the father, this most potent sacrifice.

g 1.103 Cum defecerit, sayth Bernard, vir∣tus mea, non conturbor, non diffido, scio quid faciam: calicem salutaris accipiam. That is, When my strength shall faile, I will not bee troubled, neither will I despaire. I know what I will doe, I will take the cup of saluation. And in another place. h 1.104 Totum quod dare possum miserum corpus istud est, id si minus est, addo & cor∣pus ipsius. Nam illud de meo est, & meum est: parvulus enim natus est nobis, & filius datus est mihi, de te Domine suppleo, quod minus habeo in me. O dulcissima reconciliatio! O suavissima satisfactio! That is, All that I can giue is this misera∣ble body, if that be too litle, I adde his body, for that is of mine, and it is mine: a litle child is borne vnto vs, a sonne is given vnto mee; from thee I take ô Lord to supply what I finde wanting in my selfe. O most sweete reconciliation! O most sweet satisfactoin! Who doth not see, that God doth by such a faith as that is, that is i 1.105

exercised in the celebration of this representatiue sacrifice, and in the eating of the body of Christ, the sufferings whereof are here represented, apply the benefit of Christ his dearest sonne to his faithfull ones. Neither doe wee attribute this application to the priest, but to God, nor to our worke, but to Gods benefit. Which yet wee receiue no otherwise but by faith, with the assent of our owne will.

Hitherto wee haue heard the words of the authour of the Enchiridion, and the same authour k 1.106 els-where sayth, that the orthodoxe diuines, deny the externall action which wee call the sacramentall oblation, to

conferre grace, or to haue any spirituall effect, ex opere operato. It is true, sayth hee, that a wicked man may pronounce the words of Christ, and so make the elements of bread & wine, to become the sacrament of the Lords body and bloud, and this sacrament ex opere operato, that is, out of the very nature of a sacrament, & of it selfe, how ill soeuer the minister bee, will conferre grace instrumentally, to all such as receiue it, without such indisposition, as might hinder the working of it. But if wee speake of the offering of Christ repre∣sentatiuely, it hath no force farther then the faith of the offerer extendeth. If the priest therefore not onely outwardly, but inwardly also, by the acte of faith, present the sufferings of Christ in the body of his flesh to God, in desire by the merit thereof, to escape his wrath: hee bringeth much good vpon himselfe: & if hee devoutly beseech God for his Christs sake, whose suffe∣rings hee representeth vnto him, to bee mercifull to the people committed to his charge, or to any other, there is no doubt but this his prayer, in the na∣ture of a prayer, is most powerfull to obtaine in this kind. But if hee bee wicked, & faithles, his representatiue offering of Christ, of & meerely in re∣spect of it selfe, worketh no good to himselfe, nor any other. For in the repre∣sentatiue offering of Christs passion to God, must be included, a supplication made to God for that passion sake, and a desire of those good things that wee need. Now the prayer of such a sinner God heareth not, but the people spiritually representing vnto God by the acte of their faith, that which the priest doth sacramentally, obtaine all desired good, and the removing of all e∣vill, not by force of that the priest doth, but by their owne faith, which is stirred vp by that outward acte done by him.

The most reverend Canons of the Metropoliticall Church of Colen, agree with the authour of the Enchiridion: their words are these. l 1.107 Consecratione factâ in missâ, Christus Dominus qui seipsum aliquando in corpore suo mortali Deo patri coelesti cruentum sacrificium pro peccatis mundi obtulit, denuo totius ecclesiae nomine, modo incruento, spirituali representatione, & commemoratione sacratissimae suae passionis, offertur: quod ipsum fit, quando ecclesia Christum & eius verum corpus, verumque sanguinem, Deo Patri cum gratiarum actione, & orati∣one attentâ, pro suis & totius mundi peccatis proponit, seu repraesentat: quanquam enim sacrificium illud, in eâ formâ quâ in cruce offerebatur, semel tantum oblatum sit, & semel tantum sanguis effusus; vt ita repeti, iterumque offerri non possit; nihilominus tamen consistit, & manet tale sacrificium coram Deo, perpetuò in suâ virtute & efficaciâ acceptum; ita vt sacrificium illud in cruce oblatum, non minus hodierno die in conspectu patris sit efficax, & vigens, quam eo die quo de saucio la∣tere sanguis exiuit & aqua. Quapropter cum vulnerati corporis nostri plagae pre∣tio redemptionis semper opus habeant, ecclesia proponit Deo Patri pretium illud, in verâ fide & devotione iterum, sed figuratiuè, & spiritualitèr, ad consequen∣dam remissionem peccatorum: non quod huic operi suo, quo videlicet commem or at & repraesentat sacrificium illius, meritum ascribat remissionis peceatorum, vt quam solus Christus cruentâ suâ oblatione in cruce nobis promeruit; verum tali suo com∣memoratiuo, & mystico fidei sacrificio, in quo repraesentat ecclesia, & sistit in con∣spectum patris verum corpus & sanguinem eius vnigeniti, applicat sibi & accom∣modat magnum illud donatiuum remissionis peccatorum, quod Christus impetra∣vit, cum accipiat remissionem peccatorum per nomen eius, qui credit in eum, Act.

10. That is; So soone as the consecration is done in the Masse, Christ the Lord who sometime offered himselfe in his mortall body a bloudy sacrifice to God his heauenly father, for the sins of the whole world, is now offered again after an vnbloudy manner, by representation and commemoration of his most sacred passion; which thing is then done, when the Church doth propose and represent, Christ and his true body' and bloud to God the Father with thanks∣giuing, and with earnest prayer for the remission of her sinnes, and the sinnes of the whole world: for although that sacrifice in such sort as it was offered on the Crosse, was offered onely once, and his bloud only once powred forth, so that he can no more be so offered: yet notwithstanding that sacrifice re∣maineth and abideth before God perpetually, in its vertue and efficacie; and is so acceptable vnto him, that being but once offered on the Crosse, it is no lesse effectuall, and of force in the sight of God to day, then it was that day, when water and bloud streamed out of his wounded side. Wherefore seeing the soares and hurts of our wounded bodies, haue alwayes need of the price of re∣demption, the Church proposeth to God in faith and devotion that price a∣gaine, but figuratiuely and spiritually, to obtaine remission of sin, not as if shee did ascribe to this her worke, whereby she commemorateth, and representeth that his sacrifice, the meriting of remission of sinnes, which Christ onely me∣rited for vs, by his bloudy sacrifice on the Crosse; but by such her comme∣moratiue and mysticall sacrifice of faith, in which shee representeth and setteth before the eyes of God the Father, the true body and bloud of his onely begotten Sonne, shee applyeth to her selfe that great donatiue of re∣mission of sinnes, which Christ obtained, it being so that euery one that be∣leeueth in him, receiueth remission of sinnes by his Name, as it is in the 10^th of the Acts.

m 1.108 In the booke proposed by Charles the 5^th, written by certaine learned and godly men, much commended to him by men worthie to bee credited, as ope∣ning a way for the composing of the controversies in Religion, we shall finde the same explication of this point, touching the sacrifice, that I haue already deliuered out of the former authors; the words are these. Omnis ecclesia missam, in qu•…•… verum corpus & verus sanguis Christi conficitur, sacrificium esse consen∣tit; sed incruentum & spirituale; in eâ enim (modò religiosé, & piè agatur,) Deo quatuor spiritualiter offeruntur. Initio enim Christus, qui seipsum patri in mor∣tali corpore, cruentam, sufficientem, & beneplacentem, pro totius mundi peccatis ho∣stiam, cruci affixus obtulit, idem ille in missâ, totius ecclesiae nomine, repraesentati∣vo sacrificio, eidem deo patri immolatur; quod certè fit, cùm ecclesia illum, eiusque verum corpus & sanguinem, Deo patri pro totius mundi peccatis piâ prece sistit: nam etsi oblatio illa in cruce semel facta, transiit non reiterabilis; victima tamen ipsa immolata perpetuá virtute consistit, vt non minus hodiè in conspectu patris ob∣latio illa, in iis qui eum Deo religiosa fide repraesentant, sit efficax, quàm eo die quo de sacro latere, sanguis & aqua exivit. In quam sententiam patres corpus & san∣guinem Christi in altari praesentia, nunc pretium pro peccatis totius mundi, nunc pretium redemptionis nostrae, nunc victimam salutarem appellare consueverunt. Et Chrysostomus testatur nos eandem hostiam, quae semel oblata est, in sancta sancto∣rum semper offerre, at que unum esse utrobique sacrificium, unum Christum, & hic plenum existentem, & illic plenum; sic tamen ut quod nos agimus sacrificium ex∣emplar sit illius, in commemorationem eius, quod factum est semel. Nec ab re, Deus enim in hoc donavit nobis Christum Iesum Filium suum, ut de nostris viribus diffi∣si •…•…deque nostris peccatis nobis probè conscii, illum tanquam unicam & potissimam victimam pro nostris peccatis satisfactoriam Deo patri repraesentemus: ipse enim natus est, ipse datus est nobis, ut quicunque in eum credimus, non pereamus, sed pa∣cem cum Deo reconciliati per sanguinem eius habeamus. Secundò, Ecclesia in hoc missae sacrificio seipsam quoque, quatenus Christi corpus mysticum est, per Christum Deo offerre, non dubitat. Tertiò, In missâ sacrificium laudis offertur.

Postremo Ecclesia & dona quaedam, tam panis quàm vini, ex quibus partim corpus & san•…•…uis Christi conficiebantur, offerebat, partim & eleemosynae fiebant: & iu∣stum est quod populus in hoc sacrificio se non tantum verbis deo consecret, sed & symbolo aliquo externo testetur, quod se totum dedicet Deo. Nam is mos in Eccle∣siis penè abolitus est; cum olim omnibus diebus dominicis, panis & vinum, & res aliae, ab omnibus tum viris tum mulieribus, ad altare offerebantur, quemadmodum decreta quae Fabiano tribuuntur testantnr, that is,

The whole Church doth con∣sent, that the masse in which the bread and wine are consecrated, to become the true body and bloud of Christ, is a sacrifice, but vnbloudy and spirituall, for in it (if it be Godly and religiously celebrated,) foure things are spiritually offered vnto God. For first Christ himselfe, who being fastened to the crosse offered himselfe to his Father in his mortall body, a bloudy, sufficient, and well pleasing sacrifice for the sinnes of the whole world, is in the masse offered to the same God his Father, in the name of the whole Church, by a representatiue oblation: which thing truly is then done, when the Church piously, to intreate mercie for the sins of the whole world, presenteth him and his true body and bloud to God the Father: for although that oblation that was once made on the crosse be past and cannot be reiterated, yet the thing that was then sacrifi∣ced and offered abideth, hauing a neuer failing vertue and efficacie: so that that oblation, in them that by a religious faith do represent it vnto God, is no lesse effectuall and preuailing, to procure them fauour in the sight of God, then it was that day, that water and blood streamed out of his sacred side. And in this sense the fathers are wont sometimes to call the body and blood of Christ pre∣sent on the altar, the price for the sinnes of the whole world, somtimes the price of our redemption, sometimes the sacrifice that bringeth saluation. And Chrysostome witnesseth, that we continually and dayly offer the same sacrifice, that was once offered and presented into the holiest of all; and that both there and here ther is one sacrifice, one Christ, perfect here, and perfect there; yet so, that that which wee doe is but a representation, and done in remem∣brance of that which was once there done: and this not vnfitly; for therefore did God giue vs Christ Iesus his sonne, that distrusting our owne strength and being guilty to our selues of many sinnes, we might represent and set him in the sight of God the Father, as the onely and most excellent satisfactorie sacrifice for our sins. For he was borne, and he was giuen vnto vs, that whoso∣euer of vs beleeue in him, might not perish, but might haue peace with God, being reconciled by his bloud. Secondly the Church in this sacrifice of the masse, doubteth not to offer it selfe as the mysticall body of Christ, vnto God by Christ. Thirdly, in it is offered the sacrifice of praise. Lastly, the Church was wont to offer certaine gifts, of bread and wine, out of which some part was consecrated, to become the body and bloud of Christ to the faithfull people, and the rest was giuen in almes to the poore. And truly it is very iust and right, that the people in this sacrifice, should not consecrate themselues to God in words onely, but so as to testifie by some outward symbole, that they wholly dedicate themselues to God; and therefore it is not well, that this cu∣stome is almost vtterly abolished; whereas aunciently euery Lords day, bread and wine and other things were offered on the altar, both by men and wo∣men, as the decrees attributed to Pope Fabian doe testifie. After this follow these words in the same place. I am si canon ille missae in hunc quem

diximus sensum intelligatur, nihil habet incommodi, superstitiosa tantum absit opinio quia quidam de naturâ & energiâ huius sanctissimi sacrificii ma∣le edocti, virtutem eius ex solo externo opere quod facit Sacerdos, in se deriuari putabant, tametsi illi nullam viuam fidem adferrent, nullam pietatem adhiberent, nulla communione vel precum seu orationis, sacrificio assensum praeberent: quales erant qui nullâ suae nefandae impietatis & execran∣dorum flagitiorum habitâ ratione se huic sacratissimae & diuinissimae actioni

damnabiliter miscuerunt, missam solius externi operis quod sacerdos facit virtute prodesse put antes, etsi ipsi nihil probae mentis adferrent.

That is, If the canon of the Masse bee vnderstood in this sense which wee haue expressed, there is no euill in it; so that men haue no superstitious conceipt of things: for there were some, who being ill instructed touching the nature of this sacrament, suppo∣sed that vertue might be deriued vnto them, by the sole externe action of the priest, although they brought no liuely faith, no piety, nor gaue any consent to the sacrifice, by any communion so much as of prayer: of which sort they were, who hauing no consideration of their owne horrible impieties, & evills committed by them, persevering in the purpose of sinning damnably, presu∣med to be present at this most holy action, and put themselues in a sort into it, perswading themselues that the masse, by the vertue of the externe worke of the priest alone would doe them good, though they brought no motions, affections, or desires of a good mind with them.

n 1.109

Hosius was of the same opinion with these before recited: When the priest (sayth hee) lifteth vp the eucharist, let men remember that sacrifice wherein Christ being lifted vp to the crosse, offered himselfe to God a sacrifice for vs. Let them thinke how bitter the torments were that hee sustained, & let them know that mens sins were the cause of such his sufferings; let them greiue as it is fitte they should for them, and let them shew by all meanes that they hate them. And because by his precious death hee hath so fully satisfied for all sinnes, that there are none that are not abolished; let them with good assurance & considence, goe vnto the throne of grace; and whereas wee haue no merit of our owne, let them plead that of Christ, let them present that his body that did hang on the crosse, and his bloud which was shed for the remission of our sinnes, to God the Father, and let them humbly beseech him to turne away his face from their sinnes, and to looke vpon the face of his son Christ, who bare our infirmities, to looke vpon his face, for his merit to remit their sinnes, and to graunt that they may deriue vnto themselues, all that fruite which that sacrifice of the crosse that is represented on the altar,

brought to the world, Thus he sayth the people were taught by our forefa∣thers, and this hee sayth is enough for them to know. Notwithstanding hee sheweth, that Michael Bishop of * 1.110 Merspurge, a man learned, godly, and truely catholique published certaine sermons touching the sacrifice of the mass•…•…, which hee wisheth to bee in the hands of all men; in these sermons the same explication is made of the sacrament so often mentioned, that I haue al∣ready deliuered. And with him agreeth another learned Bishop Thomas Watson sometimes Bishop of Lincolne in his o 1.111 sermons vpon the seauen sacraments; his words are these.

Christ in heaven and wee his mysticall body on earth doe but one thing: for Christ being a Priest for euermore, after his passion and resurrection entred into heauen, and there appeareth now to the countenance of God for vs; offe∣ring himselfe for vs, to pacifie the anger of God against vs, and representing his passion and all that he suffered for vs, that we might be reconciled to God by him: euen so the Church our mother being carefull for vs her children that * 1.112 haue offended our father in heauen, vseth continually by her publique mini∣ster to pray & to offer vnto God the body & bloud of her husband Christ; re∣presenting & renewing his passion and death before God, that wee thereby might bee renewed in grace, and receiue life, perfection, and saluation: and after the same sort the holy Angels of God, in the time of this our sacrifice do * 1.113 assist the priest and stand about the host, thinking that the meetest time to shew their charitie towards vs and therefore holding forth the body of Christ praye for mankind, as saying thus, Lord wee pray for them whom thou hast so loued that for their saluation thou hast suffered death, & spent thy life vpon the crosse; we make supplication for them, for whom thou hast shed this thy

bloud, we pray for them for whom thou hast offered this same thy very bo∣dy. In that houre when Christs death is renewed in mysterie & his most * 1.114 fearefull and acceptable sacrifice is represented to the sight of God, then sitteth the King on his Mercie-seat, enclined to giue and forgiue whatsoeuer is demaunded and asked of him in humble manner. In the presence of this * 1.115 body and bloud of our Sauiour Christ, the teares of a meeke and humble man neuer beg pardō in vain, nor the sacrifice of a contrite heart is neuer put back, but hath his lawfull desires granted & giuen. By resorting to this sacrifice of the masse, we evidently declare & protest before God & the whole world, that we put our singular & only trust of grace & saluation in Christ our Lord, for the merits of his death & his passion, & not for the worthinesse of any good worke that we haue done, or can doe, & that we make his passion our only re∣fuge. For when wisedome faileth, which onely commeth by the doctrine of * 1.116 Christ; when righteousnesse lacketh, which onely is gotten by the mercie of Christ; when vertue ceaseth, which onely is receiued from him who is the Lord of all vertue, then for supplying of these our lacks & needs, our refuge is to Christs passion, then we run, as the Prophet saith, to the cup of our Sauiour * 1.117 and call vpon the Name of our Lord: that is to say, we take his passion, & of∣fer to God the Father in mystery, the worke of our redemption, that by this * 1.118 memorie & commemoration of it, it would please his mercifull goodnes to innovate his grace in vs, & to replenish vs with the fruit of his Sonns passion. We are become debtors to Almighty God for our manifold sins & iniquities done against him, we can neuer pay this debt, no scarse one farthing of a 1000 pounds, what remedie then haue we but to run to the rich man our neighbour that hath enough to pay for vs all; I meane Christ our Lord, who hath payde his heart bloud, for no debt of his own, but for our debt: & there whiles wee celebrate the memory of his passion, we acknowledge & confesse our sinnes, which be without number, & grant, that we are not able to satisfie for the least of them, & therfore beseech our mercifull Father to accept in full payment & satisfaction of our debts, his passion, which after this sort as hee hath ordained to be done in the sacrifice of the masse, we renew & represent before him; & where our sinfull life hath altogether displeased him, wee offer vnto him his welbeloued Son with whom we are sure he is well pleased, most humbly ma∣king supplication to accept him for vs, in whom only we put all our trust, ac∣counting him all our righteousnes, & the authour of our saluation. Thus doth the Church daylie renew in mysterie the passion of Christ, & doth represent it before God in the holy masse, for the attaining of all the graces & benefites purchased by the same passion before, after the measure of his goodnes: & as our faith & deuotion is knowne vnto him. And againe, The Church offereth Christ Gods Sonne, to God the Father, that is, representeth to the Father the body and bloud of Christ, which by his omnipotencie hee hath there made present, and thereby reneweth his passion not by suffering of death againe, but after an vnbloudy manner, not for this end that we should thereby deserue remission of sins, & deliuerance from the power of the deuill, which is the proper effect of Christs passion, but that we should by faith, devotion, & this representation of his passion, obtaine remission & grace already deser∣ued by his passion to be now applyed to our profite and saluation &c. not that we can apply the merits of Christs death as we list, & to whō we list, but that we by the representation of his passion, most humbly make petition & pray∣er to Almighty God to apply vnto vs the remission & grace which was pur∣chased & deserued by Christs passion before, after the measure of his good∣nes, and as our faith and deuotion is knowne vnto him. The thing offered both in the sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse, & in the sacrifice of the Church on the Altar is all one in substance being the naturall body of Christ our high Priest, and the price and ransome of our redemption, but the manner

and effects of these two offerings are diuerse, the one is by the shedding of Christs bloud extending to the death of Christ the offerer for the redemp∣tion of all mankind; the other is without shedding of his bloud, onely repre∣senting his death whereby the faithfull and deuout people are made parta∣kers of the merits of Christs passion.

Hitherto the Bishoppe of Lincolne, and to the same purpose the p 1.119 Authour of the Enchiridion of Christian religion hath these words. Diligenter ergo haec omnia nobis intuentibus, nihil vel absurdi, vel scrupulosi in toto missae con∣textu occurret, sedomnia (praesertim quae canon complectitur) pietatis plenissi∣ma ac plané reuerenda (vt sunt) videbuntur. Aut enim Ecclesia respicit ad corpus & sanguinem Christi, pro se in cruce oblata, & vi omnipotentis verbi in al∣tari praesentia, & non veretur haec appellare hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, ho∣stiam immaculatam, panem sanctum vitae aeternae, & calicem salutis perpetuae; aut ad oblationem repraesentatiuam, & commemoratiuam passionis seu corporis Chri∣sti veri, (quae fide misericordiam per Christum apprehendente & redemptionem quae est in Christo deo patri opponente peragitur:) & non dubitat hoc sacrificium lau∣dis offerre, pro se suisque omnibus pro spe salutis & incolumitatis suae; nimirum spem salutis & incolumitatis, ac redemptionem animarum, debitalaude ac gra∣tiarum actione deo accepta referens; petitque vt hanc oblationem seruitutis suae Deus placatus accipiat, diesque nostros in sua pace disponat, atque ab aeterna damnatione nos eripi, et in electorum suorum grege iubeat numerari, non quidem ex meritis nostris, aut ex dignitate nostrae seruitutis, sed per Christum dominum no∣strum.

that is, If wee rightly looke into these things, nothing will occurre vnto vs, in the whole context of the masse, that may iustly seeme absurd, or cause any scruple, but all things there found, especially such as are con∣tained in the canon, will appeare vnto vs, as they are indeede, full of pie∣ty, and much to be reuerenced; for either the Church hath respect, to the body and bloud of Christ offered for her on the crosse, and by force of his Al∣mighty word, present on the altar, and so feareth not to call these a pure host, an holy host, an immaculate host, the holy bread of eternall life, and the cuppe of eternall saluation; or else shee hath an eye to the representa∣tiue and commemoratiue oblation, of the passion or true body of Christ, which consisteth in faith, apprehending mercy by Christ, and opposing vnto God the redemption that is in Christ, and soe shee doubteth not to offer this sacrifice of praise, for her selfe and all her members, for the hope of her saluation and safety; that is, with all due praise and thankesgiuing shee acknowledgeth that shee hath receiued from GOD, the hope of saluation, safetie, and the redemption of the soules of her sonnes and daughters, and desireth that God will take in good part this oblation of her service and bounden dutie, that hee will dispose our dayes in peace, that hee will deliuer vs from eternall condemnation, and that hee will make vs to be numbred with his e∣lect, not for our merits or the worthinesse of this seruice, but thorough Christ our Lord.

With these q 1.120 Georgius Wicelius, a man much honoured by the Emperours Ferdinand and Maximilian, fully agreeth; defining the masse to bee a sacrifice rememoratiue, and of praise and thankesgiuing; and in another place he saith, the masse is a commemoration of the passion of Christ celebrated in the pub∣like * 1.121 assembly of Christians, where many giue thinkes for the price of redempti∣on. With these agreeth the Interim published by Charles the fift in the the as∣sembly * 1.122 of the states of the Empire at Augusta March 15^t 1548 and there accep∣ted by the same states.

But some man happily will say, here are many authorities alleaged, to proue that sundry worthy diuines in the Roman Church, in Luthers time, de∣nyed the new reall offering, or sacrificing of Christ, and made the sacri∣fice of the altar to bee onely representatiue, and commemoratiue, but be∣fore

his time there were none found soe to teach. Wherefore I will shew the consent of the Church to haue beene cleare for vs to uching this point, before his time, and against the Tridentine doctrine now prevailing.

Bonaventura in his exposition of the masse hath these words.

The bo∣dy of Christ is eleuated and lifted vp in the masse for diuers causes; but the first and principall is, that wee may obtaine and regaine the favour of God the Father which wee haue lost by our sinnes, for there is nothing that of∣fendeth God and provoketh him to be dipleased but sinne only, as the Psalmist sayth, they prouoked and displeased God with their inuentions: the Priest therefore lifteth vp the body of Christ on the altar, as if hee should thus say. O heauenly Father, wee haue sinned and provoked thee to anger, but now looke on the face of Christ thy sonne, whom wee present vnto thee to moue thee to turne from thy wrath and displeasure, to mercie and grace; turne not away thy face therefore from this thy holy child Iesus, from this thy sonne, but remem∣ber that thou hast sayd of this same thy sonne; this is my welbeloued sonne in whom I am well pleased: correct therefore mercifully in vs, whatsoeuer thou findest in vs fit to be corrected, and turne vs vnto thee and turne thy wrath from vs.

The question is proposed, sayth t 1.123 Petrus Cluniacensis, why this sacrifice is so often repeated, seeing Christ once offered on the crosse, is sufficient to take away the sinnes of the whole world, especially seeing here and there, not a diuers, but the same sacrifice, that is, the same Christ, is offered. For if that on the crosse sufficed, this seemeth to bee supefluous; but it is not superfluous &c. for after hee had sayd doe this, hee addeth in remem∣brance of mee. This then is the cause of this Sacrament, euen the commemoration of CHRIST. Our Sauiour knew what hee had done, and what hee would doe for man; hee knew how great and singular that worke was which hee had done, in putting on the nature of man; hee knewe how wonderfull that worke would bee that hee was to do, when hee should die for man; hee knew that by this worke hee should saue man; but that noe man could be saued without the loue of this worke; hee knew that this worke of his becomming man, and dying for man, as it was renowned a∣boue all his workes, soe it was especially to bee recommended vnto men, for whome it was done: it was specially to bee commended to them, see∣ing his flesh was tormented for them, his soule grieued and death seized on him, that they might liue; this was solemnly to be commended vnto them, that Christ might bee beloued, that being beloued, hee might be possessed, that being once had, hee might neuer bee lost. But this loue of him could not haue beene retained by men, if they should-haue forgotten him, nei∣ther could they haue retained the memorie of him, vnlesse they should haue beene put in minde of him, by some fitting outward signe. For this cause was this signe proposed and appointed by CHRIST, which yet is so a signe, that it is the same thing that it signifieth, and herein it dif∣fereth from the sacrifices of the old Law, which were not that they signi∣fied.

Sed istud nostri sacrificij signum, non aliud sed ipsum est quod signat, ita vero est ci idem quod signat, vt quantum ad corpus, id est, ad veritatem carnis & sanguinis Christi pertinet, sit idem quod signat, non quoad mortem & passionem, neque enim ibi Christus vt olim dolorem & mortem patitur, cum tamen immolari dicatur, cum videlicet inviolabiter in altari frangitur, diui∣ditur, comeditur, cum ijs, & quibusdam alijs signis in quantum fieri potest mors domini maximè repraesentatur, vnde sicut dixi, quantum ad veritatem corporis & sanguinis Christi pertinet, est idem quod signat non quoad mor∣tem & passionem, quam tamen maximè signat.

that is, This signe of our sacrifice is noe other but the same thing that it signifieth, but wee must soe vnderstand it to bee the same thing that it signifieth, in respect

of the trueth of the flesh and bloud of Christ which it signifieth, but not in re∣spect of his passion & death, though it very liuely expresse & signifie that also, for Christ doth not there suffer griefe or death, as once he did, though hee be said there to be offered & immolated, when hee is inviolably broken vpon the altar, distributed & eaten, & when by these & the like signes, Christs death is represented asmuch as possibly it may be, so that as I said, if we speake of the trueth of the body and bloud of Christ, this signe is the thing it signifieth, but if we speake of the death and suffering of Christ it is not so, though it doe very clearely & expressely represent & signifie that his death and passion. Thus we see, he maketh the sacrifice to be merely representatiue.

u 1.124 Algerus excellently expresseth the same thing in these words. Notandum quia quotidianum nostrum sacrificium, idem ipsum dicit cum eo; quo Christus semel oblatus est in cruce, quantum ad eandem veram hic & ibi corporis substantiā; quod verò nostrum quotidianum illius semel oblati dicit esse exemplum, id est, figuram, vel formam, non dicit ut hic vel ibi alium Christum constituat, sed ut eundem in cruce semel, in altari quotidiè, alio modo immolari & offerri ostendat; ibi in verita∣te passionis quâ pro nobis occisus est; hic in figurâ & imitatione passionis ipsius, quâ Christus non iterum verè patitur, sed ipsius verè memoria passionis quotidiè nobis iteratur: quod & ipse Ambrosius notans subiicit. Quod nos facimus, in commemora∣tionem fit eius quod factum est; hoc enim facite, inquit, in meam commemorationē, non aliud sacrificium sed ipsum semper offerimus, magis autem sacrificii recordatio∣nem operamur. Non ergo est in ipsius Christi veritate diversitas, sed in ipsius im∣molationis actione, quae dum veram Christi passionem & mortem quâdam suâ simi∣litudine figurando repraesentat, nos ad imitationē ipsius passionis invitat, & accen∣dit, contra hostem nos roborat, & munit, & à vitiis purgans, & virtutibus conde∣corans, vitae aeternae idoneos & dignos exhibet.

That is, It is to bee noted, that our daylie sacrifice is the same thing with that sacrifice whereby Christ was once offered vpon the crosse, in that the same true substance is offered here, that was offered there, whereas therefore he saith, that the sacrifice which we day∣lie offer, is a similitude, figure, or representation of that sacrifice which Christ once offered, he is not to be conceiued to imagine, that there is one Christ es∣sentially here, & another there, but his meaning is to shew that the same Christ once offered on the crosse, is dayly offered in another sort on the altar, there in the truth of his passion being slaine for vs, here in figure and imitation of his passion: not suffering againe indeed, but hauing the memory of his passion which once he endured, daylie renewed: which thing Ambrose himself also ob∣seruing, hath these words. That which we doe is done in remembrance of that which was then done, for he saith, doe this in remembrance of me. We do not therefore offer another sacrifice, but we alwayes offer the same, or rather that we doe, is a remembrance of that sacrifice, which was once offered. There is therefore no diuersitie in the trueth and being of that Christ that offered himselfe, and that wee offer, but in the action of offering. For while that which wee doe, representeth the true passion and death of CHRIST, and by a certaine similitude it hath of the same, setteth it liuely before our eyes, it inviteth and enflameth vs to the imitation of his passion, it strengtheneth & confirmeth vs, against the enemie, it purgeth vs from sin, beautifieth vs with vertues, and maketh vs meete & worthy to enter into e∣ternall life.

And afterwards hee hath these words. Semel passus in cruce, qui non manifestè sed invisibilitèr est in sacramento, quotidie non passus, sed quasi pa•…•… repraesentatus, hanc immolationem non vero sed imaginario actu passionis & mortis fieri, & tamen veram salutem operari testatur, Gregorius dialog. 4. c. 58. That is, Christ suffered once on the crosse, who not visibly but invisibly is in the sacra∣ment; neither doth hee daily suffer, but his suffering is daily represented, this im∣molation or offering Gregorie saith consisteth not in the trueth of passion or death, but in a meere representation of the same, and that yet it worketh true sal∣vation.

And after hee addeth, Licet non verâ sed imaginariâ passione in seipsa immoletur; verâ tamen & non imaginariâ passione in membris suis immolatur, quando nos qui in memoriam passionis suae, sacramentum tantae pietatis suae agimus sacrificando ipsum, flendo, & cor nostrum verâ compunctione atterendo, mor∣tem tam pij & dilecti Domini & patris annunciamus. That is, Though Christ bee not offered by any reall passion in himselfe, but in a meere representation of his passion, yet hee is offered by a true and more than imaginary passion in his members, while wee who in memory of his passion celebrate this sacrament, of his so great goodnesse & louing kindnes towards vs, & offer this sacrifice by weeping & breaking our heart with true compunction, shew forth the death of our so gracious and dearely beloued Lord and father.

Paschasius maketh the same construction of the sacrifice; and x 1.125 Peter Lom∣bard proposing the question, whether that the priest doth, may properly bee named a sacrifice, or immolation, answereth, that Christ was onely once true∣ly & properly offered in sacrifice, and that hee is not properly immolated or sacrificed, but in sacrament & representation onely.

Bellarmines shift to avoyd this testimonie is very sillie, for hee sayth that Peter Lombard did not propose the question, whether and how Christ may bee sayd to bee sacrificed, but how hee may be sayd to bee so sacrificed, as to be slaine, and that in this sense he sayth truely, that Christ was onely once proper∣ly sacrificed, for that he cannot bee sayd any more to bee killed or slaine, but in mystery and signification or representation onely. Whereas it is most cleere and evident, that hee proposeth the question simply, and in generall, whether hee may be said to bee sacrificed or not; and seeing the sacrificing of a liuing thing, doth import the killing and destroying of it, and the sacrificing of Christ the killing of Christ, he y 1.126 pronounceth that as Christ can die no more, so hee can no more be properly sacrificed, and that therefore when he is said to bee sacrificed or offered in the eucharist, wee must vnderstand that hee is offe∣red onely in representation, and not really. That this is his meaning, it appea∣reth by that which he hath, writing vpon the epistle to the z 1.127 Hebrewes, where hee doth not propose the question whether Christ may be said to be so offered often, as to die often, but how it commeth to passe, that the Church daily offe∣reth sacrifice, seeing, as the Apostle saith, where there is one sacrifice hauing force to take away sin once offered, there is no neede that any more sacrifices should bee offered; and answereth herevnto, that the thing now offered is the same that was offered on the crosse; that the offering of it now is commemora∣tiue, & that that which we do, is but recordatio sacrificij, the calling to minde of Christs sacrifice once offered, that it may be applied vnto vs, for the remission of our sinnes; so absolutely excluding all sacrifice for sinne properly so called, of what kind soeuer it be. And a 1.128 Thomas Aquinas on the same place, proposing the obiection of the repetition, and daily reiteration of sacrifice in the Church, which seemeth to import, that that of Christ was not sufficient to take away sin, answereth, that we offer not any other, but the very same sacrifice that Christ did, that is, his body & bloud; & that it is no new or different oblation proper∣ly so named, but a cōmemoration only of that sacrifice w^ch Christ once offered.

b 1.129 Henricus Gorrichem writing vpon the sentences saith, that in the eucharist there is the offering of a sacrifice, not really or in the thing it selfe, but in simi∣litude; for that which is there dayly done, is a signe bringing to our remem∣brance, and figuring or representing that oblation, that was once made. With whom c 1.130 Lyra agreeth, his words are. Si dicas sacrificium altaris quotidiè offer∣tur in Ecclesia; dicendum quod non est ibi sacrificii iteratio, sed vnius sacri∣ficii in cruce oblati quotidiana commemoratio. that is If thou say the sacrifice of the altar is dayly offered in the Church, it must be answered, that there is noe reiteration of the sacrifice, but a dayly commemoration of that sacrifice, that was once offered on the crosse. This hee saith in answere to that obiection, that seeing now as in the

time of the law, there is often offering for sin, it seemeth no sufficient sacrifice hath beene offered, which obiection could not be cleared by his answere, vn∣lesse he denied the often offering of any kind of sacrifice for sin whether bloudy or vnbloudy.

Wherefore that which d 1.131 Bellarmine hath, that Aquinas & the other Schoolemē for the most part, do no otherwise say that the sacrifice of the masse is an immo∣latiō of Christ, but in that it is a represētatiō of Christs immolatiō on the crosse, or because it hath like effects with that true & reall sacrificing of Christ that im∣plyed his death, is most true: his euasion is found too silly, & it is made cleare & euident, that the best & worthiest amongst the guides of Gods Church before Luthers time, taught as we do, that the sacrifice of the altar is only the sacrifice of praise & thankesgiuing, and a mere representation and commemoration of the sacrifice once offered on the crosse, and consequently are all put vnder the curse, and anathematized by the e 1.132 Tridentine councell. Soe that the face of religion was not the same, before, and at Luthers appearing, that now it is, as M Brerely would haue vs to beleeue.

Wherefore to conclude this point, it appeareth by that which hath beene said, that neither the canon of the Masse rightly vnderstood, includeth in it any such points of Romish Religion, as some imagine, but in sundry, yea in all the capitall differences, betweene vs and them of the Romane faction, witnesseth for vs, and against them; & that the Prelates and guides of the Church formerly made no such construction of it, as now is made. That it may haue a good sense, our men confesse. I could, saith Luther, make such a construction of the canon of the Masse, as might stand with the rule of faith, and I haue som∣where so done, but seeing it is obscure, and the rule of the Lawyers is, that hee that will speake obscurely, shall haue his words construed against him, and not for him, I will not saith hee take so much paines, as to seeke out and declare the best meaning, that may be conceiued of it, but a better forme being found out will leaue this and embrace that. That it is obscure I shewed out of Cassan∣der, and that if it be to be retained it must haue some scholies, or explications, either added in the margent, or inserted into the text, that it may be vnder∣stood and rightly vsed, which thing if it be done, it will seeme a new one, and if it haue such explications as hee would haue, it will differ little or nothing from our liturgie.

There is extant a ceraine f 1.133 forme of reformation exhibited by Charles the fift to the ecclesiasticall states of the Empire, and accepted and receiued by them, wherein they professe, that the canon of the masse, which the Church of God hath vsed and retained soe many ages, containeth nothing in it that is not consonant to the courses of antiquity, so that it is not to be cōdemned or chan∣ged, by any priuate authority, so insinuating that by publike it may, but tou∣ching the other parts of the masse, though for the most part they bee nothing but praises of God, prayers of the Church, and holy lessons, and readings, and so farre forth not to be despised, yet if there be any new collects, sequences, or prefaces, either vnlearned or depending vpon Apocryphall histories, or not soe fitting to the sacrifice of the masse, which later ages haue brought in, they prescribe that they be remoued, and that things may bee brought backe to their auncient purity. Besides this wee haue extant certaine g 1.134 ar∣ticles concerning the reformation of the Church proposed by the embassadors of Ferdinand the Emperour, in the councell of Trent, amongst which these are found. That the breuiaries and missalls should bee purged; that all those things which are not taken out of diuine scripture, should be remo∣ued; that the prolixity of Psalmes and prayers should be contracted, good choise beeing made; that a new agend or forme of diuine seruice should bee composed, and that then all that would not vse it, should bee seuerely pu∣nished.

So that M Brerelies maine objection which he thought vnanswerable, fal∣leth to the ground. For the Canon of the Masse rightly vnderstood, is found to containe nothing in it, contrary to the rule of faith, & the profession of the pro∣testant Churches; the abuses of priuate Masses & halfe cōmunions, are found to haue bin beside, & against the words & meaning of them that composed the ca∣non, and not without the dislike of many good men, before and since Luthers time; and the construction that they now make of the word sacrifice, so often vsed in it, appeareth to be a meere perverting of the meaning of the Canon; to a sinister sense, neuer intended by the authors of it, nor euer allowed by the best men in the Church. This Canon notwithstanding, is found to haue some passa∣ges, that in the judgement of men right learned, can not well haue any true meaning, vnlesse the old custome of offering bread and wine on the Lords Ta∣ble, out of which the Sacrament may be consecrated, be restored; so that those parts, that custome being discontinued, may well be omitted. Some other parts are obscure, & need explicatiō, which being added, ot inserted, it will differ litle or nothing from those formes of consecratiō of those holy mysteries that now are in use in the reformed Churches of England, & some other places, therfore brought in, because in later ages many things were added to the canon anci∣ently in vse, which the best & grauest in the Church thought fit to be taken a∣way, & a new forme of diuine seruice to be composed. So that the Church that formerly was, hauing no different judgment touching matters dogmaticall, no liking of those abuses in practise which som had brought in; & wishing things to be brought to such a course as Protestants now haue brought them, it may well be said to haue bin a Protestant Church, in such sort as I haue formerly shewed.

Only two things may be objected against that which hath been said; the one touching prayer for the dead; the other touching the commemoration of the Saints, & prayer that God through their intercession, & for their merite, will giue vnto vs such things as we desire; both which seeme to make much against the Religion of Protestants, & to be points of Romane Religion, & contained in the very canon of the Masse, which the Church vsed in the dayes of our Fa∣thers; so that that Church wherein they liued and died could bee no Protestant Church. But the answer hereunto is easie. For touching the first of these two, which is prayer for the dead, it is well knowne that Protestants doe not simply condemne all prayer in this kinde, For they pray for the resurrection, publique acquitall in the day of judgment, & the perfect consummation & blisse, of them that rest in the Lord, and the perfecting of whatsoeuer is yet wanting vnto them.

The Apologie of the confession of Augusta, saith expressely in the name of all those worthy Princes People & States that subscribed the Augustane con∣fession, that they do not condemne nor forbid prayer for the dead. And h 1.135 Chem∣nicius saith, it is a bestiall apathie for men not to be affected with the death of their friends, presently so soone as euer they are gone to put all remembrance of them out of their mindes, and not to wish good vnto them, nor to pray that it may be well with them; which desires and prayers yet must be moderated according to the word of God.

That it is lawfull to pray for the acquitall & publick remission of sins in the day of judgement, and the performing & perfecting of whatsoeuer is yet be∣hind, there is no question that I know made by any; and I am well assured that in so doing, we exceeding christianly expresse our loue towards the departed, and giue testimony of our perswasion, that the soules of them that die doe liue; and that their bodies also shall bee raysed vp at the last day; which thing, as Cassander saith truely, all the Christian Churches throughout the world, as well those of the East, as of the West, doe & euer did; though they doe not so certainely resolue what their state is that are departed hence, what is yet

wanting vnto them, or wherein or how far forth they may bee benefitted by our prayers; but the Romish conceipt of Purgatorie, and their praying to de∣liuer thence, none of the Easterne Churches admit, neither doe wee.

This is that which our Aduersaries must finde in the Canon of the Masse, if they will say any thing against vs, for the proofe of the Romish religion, out of the canon. Let vs heare therefore what the forme of the prayer for the dead is, which is found in the canon of the Masse. The words of it are; Remem∣ber Lord thy servants and thine handmaides; N. or N. which are gone before vs with the badge of faith, and doe sleepe in the sleepe of peace. O Lord wee pray thee to graunt to them and to all that are at rest in Christ, a place of refreshing, of light and peace. That this prayer hath no respect to Purgatorie, or to the deliue∣rance thence, it is evident. For how doe they sleepe in peace that are tor∣mented in Purgatorie? and whose paines are no lesse than those of hell, though they bee not eternall? Or who is so voyde of sense as to thinke, that all that are at rest in Christ are tormented in Purgatorie, and that to all these God is en∣treated in this prayer to graunt a place of refreshing, of light & peace.

So that first it is euident, that a place of refreshing, light, and peace is wish∣ed, to such as are not in Purgatorie. For it is wished to all that are at rest in the Lord. But all that are at rest in the Lord, are not in Purgatorie; whence it will further follow, that the Church prayeth for them that shee doth not thinke to bee in Purgatorie, and consequently that prayer for the dead proueth not Purgatorie, as they would make the world beleeue that it doth. And se∣condly, that the Church at that time when this forme of prayer was first com∣posed, did not beleeue or thinke that there is any Purgatory. For if shee had had any such perswasion, shee would not haue forgotten to recommend to God, the wofull estate of men so afflicted as they are supposed to bee that are there.

That this prayer can haue no reference to the state of men in Purgatorie paines, it is so cleere, that i 1.136 Iohn the 22▪ (who supposed, (as many of the auncient also did long before him, and the Easterne Christians still doe;) that the soules of the iust are so at rest in Christ, that yet they remaine vnder the altar, that is, vnder the protection and comfort of the humanity of Christ, in a state & place of happines foretasted, but not fully enioyed, and that they shall not bee lifted vp aboue, to the view of the deitie of Christ as it is in it selfe, & the vision of God the Father Sonne and holy Ghost till the judgement,) pro∣duceth this prayer for confirmation of his opinion, supposing that seeing a place of refreshing & peace is here wished to them that are at rest in Christ, (which cannot in any sense be vnderstood of such as are in purgatory,) there∣fore there is some state of men free from paine & punishment, wherein they are & expect the accomplishment of happines. To which though k 1.137 Ockam so answere, that hee would haue this prayer to haue reference to the estate of distressed soules in Purgatory; yet in the end hee sayth, it may bee vnderstood of the soules of holy men that are in heaven, & the meaning of it is, that the soules of such men as sleepe in the sleepe of peace, hauing resumed their bodies may enter into that place of refreshing light & peace, that includeth the high∣est essentiall & accidentall degree of eternall peace, which they cannot haue till the resurrection. And l 1.138 Florus that liued in the time of Carolus Calvus, in his exposition of the Masse, saith, it is most cleare that the soules of perfect iust men, so soone as they are loosed from the body are receiued into heauen; but this is to bee vnderstood of the soules of Apostles, Martyrs, and confessours, and men of great perfection of life. For the soules of certaine just men are not presently admitted into the heavenly kingdome; but though they bee in blessed rest, yet are stayed in certaine mansions, by which their stay and not enjoying presently what they most desire, it appeareth they come short of perfect righteousnesse. Besides these, he thinketh there is a third sort, of such

as are in Purgatorie. Bernard, as it appeareth in the place of m 1.139 Ockams dia∣logues aboue cited, maketh three estates of the soule; the first in corpore corrup∣tibili, the second in requie, the third in beatitudine consummatâ; the first in the body subject to death & corruption, the second in rest, the third in consum∣mate happinesse. The second excludeth all punishment & affliction, the third all desire of having any higher perfection, or attayning any farther good. A man of great place & worth that hath written not long since, feareth not to deliuer his opinion, that the soules of the iust are so in rest & peace, and in hea∣uenly mansions immediatly after their departure hence, that yet they come not into the highest heaven & place of greatest felicity till the resurrection. Which of these opinions the authour of this forme of prayer followed, it doth not certainely appeare. But sure it is hee thought those who are there commen∣ded to God, to bee in a state of rest, farre from paine & torment; and so desi∣red the perfecting of whatsoeuer is yet wanting vnto them, without any refe∣rence to purgatory, or the deliuering of any thence.

From this of prayer for the dead, let vs come to the other objection touch∣ing the commemoration of the blessed Apostles, & other Saints & holy Mar∣tyrs, by & through whose intercession, & for whose merits, the priest & peo∣ple desireth God to graunt that they may in all things be kept safe & strongly defended, by the help of diuine protection.

That the Saints doe pray for vs in genere, desiring God to bee mercifull to vs, and to doe vnto vs whatsoeuer in any kind he knoweth needfull for our good, there is no question made by vs; and therefore this prayer wherein the Church desireth God to bee gracious to her, & to graunt the things shee desireth, the rather for that the Saints in heauen also are suppliants for her, will not be found to containe any poynt of Romish doctrine disliked by vs.

But they will say, there is mention made in this prayer of the merits of those holy Apostles & Martyrs, and the Church desireth God to graunt her petitions for those merits, which is contrary to the doctrine of Protestants, that deny all merit properly so named, and therefore cannot but condemne the opinion of one mans meriting for another.

For answere herevnto wee must obserue, as n 1.140 Cassander rightly noteth, that there is no merit properly so named, to bee attributed to mortall & miserable men; and that though the ecclesiasticall writers vse the word merit, and when they speake of holy mens workes call them merits, yet they thinke them not to bee properly so; but doe so name the good actions of holy men that pro∣ceed from faith, and the working of the holy Ghost, because Almighty God, though they bee his gifts, and joyned in them, by whom they are wrought, with defect & imperfection, yet is so pleased to accept of them out of his goodnesse, that he not onely rewardeth the doers of them with ample & great rewards in their owne persons, but so as to doe good to others for their sakes. So God sayd to Abraham, if there were but fifty righteous in the city, hee would spare the whole city for their sakes. Neither onely doth hee good for their sakes whose workes hee thus rewardeth, while they liue, but euen after they àre dead also. And therefore God promiseth that hee will protect Hierusalem for his owne sake, and for Dauid his seruant, which he must be vn∣derstood to doe, not onely in respect of the promise made vnto him, but with respect had to his vertue, according to the which we read 1 Reg. 15. 3. that God left a little light in Hierusalem, to Abiam the sonne of Roboam King of Iudah for Dauids sake; who did that which was right in the sight of the Lord. This Dauid, saith o 1.141 Chrysostome, did not only please God while he was in the bo∣dy, but he is found to haue yeelded great comfort after his death, to such as he left behinde him aliue. The Prophet Esay commeth to Hezekiah and saith vnto him, I will defend this city for mine own sake, and for Dauid my seruants sake. David is dead, but his vertues that pleased God do still liue. O strange thing! O

ineffable clemencie! a man long since dead, patronizeth him that liueth. In this sense then it is that the Church desireth God to be gratious vnto her, in graun∣ting her petitions for the merit of those his holiest Ones, that she remembreth, no way derogating from the merites of Christ, but putting a great difference betweene them and those of the Saints, for Christs merite is the onely price of our redemption, by which onely we are redeemed from sinne & eternall death, and being reconciled to God, are adopted to bee sonnes and heires of eternall life: but the merites of the Saints here mentioned, are nothing but those imper∣fect good workes which they did while they liued here; which God was plea∣sed so to accept, that hee promised not onely to reward them with great and ample rewards in their owne persons, but to doe good for their sakes that did them to others also.

p 1.142 Bucer speaking of the publique prayers of the Church, which wee call Collects, in which the intercession and merites of Saints are commemorated, hath these words. Seeing in these prayers, whatsoeuer is attributed to the in∣tercession and merites of Saints, all that is asked, not of the Saints, but of our mer∣cifull God through Iesus Christ, they that so pray, doe thereby professe and testifie, that they acknowledge, that those things which they aske of God, by the intercession, and for the merites of the Saints, are the free gifts of God, &c: And a little after: Wee willingly acknowledge, and publiquely professe, that GOD doth reward the workes of his Saints, not onely in their owne persons, but in those also that pertaine vnto them, and for whom they intercede, for hee hath promised to doe good to a thousand generations to them that loue him, and study to keepe his Com∣maundements; hence it was that hee would not heale those of the house of Abime∣lech, till Abraham interceded and intreated for them, and hence it was that God graunted and gaue the deliuerance and saluation of all the people to Moses, when he intreated for the same. These are the wordes of Bucer, which not being contradicted by any of our profession, it is evident that no part of Romish Re∣ligion disliked by vs, can bee prooued out of this part of the Canon of the Masse.

Thus hauing cleared that great objection of M^r Brerelie touching the pub∣lique Liturgie, vsed in the Church in the dayes of our Fathers, and made it appeare, that the vsing thereof, is no proofe that the Church that then was, was not a Protestant Church, and hauing made it cleare and evident that both the Liturgie it selfe, and the profession of such as vsed it, shew plainely that the Church that then was, neuer allowed any Romish errour, howsoeuer some did in the midst of her: it remaineth that I now proceed to shew in the particu∣lars, that the outward face of Religion, at, and before Luthers appearing, was not, as M^• Brerelie telleth vs, the now professed Romane Religion, and that whatsoeuer wee haue done in the reformation of the Church, was long be∣fore wished for, and desired by the best men amongst the guides of the Church.

CHAP. 1.

Of the Canon of the Scriptures.

THat the Church did not admit the Canon of Scripture which the Ro∣manists now doe, nor euer accounted those bookes Canonicall which we thinke to be Apocryphall, it will easily appeare, in that all the most famous Divines, from the beginning of the Christian World, euen till the time of Luther, did reject those bookes as Apocryphall that wee doe. The Church of the Iewes (to whom as S. Paul saith, the oracles of God were committed) admitted but onely 22 Bookes, as deliuered to them from * 1.143 God, to be the Canon of their faith, as q 1.144 Iosephus witnesseth. Neither did the

Christian Church euer admit any more.

b 1.145 Melito Bishop of Sardis being desired by Onesimus to send him a catalogue of the bookes of the old and new Testament, writeth thus vnto him.

Hauing diligently sought out the bookes of the old Testament, and put them in or∣der, I haue sent them vnto you: the names whereof are these: the 5 bookes of Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leuiticus, Numbers, Deuteronomie; then Iesus the sonne of Naue, Iudges, Ruth, the 4 bookes of Kings, two bookes of Chro∣nicles, the Psalmes of Dauid, the Prouerbes, which is also called the Wis∣dome of Salomon; Ecclesiastes, the Canticles, Iob, the Prophets, Esay, Hiere∣mie, one booke of the twelue Prophets, Daniel, Ezechiel, Esdras. Some soe

translate the words of Melito, as if hee reckoned the wisdome of Salomon, as a seperate booke, and so meant the booke that is commonly called the Wisdome of Salomon, and is by vs accounted to be apocryphall: but Ruffinus translateth as wee doe; and that wee haue rightly expressed the meaning of this worthy Bishoppe, and that hee onely added this, as a glorious title to the booke of Sa∣lomons Prouerbs, which (as c 1.146 Eusebius saith) the auncients vsually called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the reader will soone be satisfied, if he peruse that, which D. Raynolds hath touching this point in his d 1.147 prelections. e 1.148 Eusebius she weth that Iosephus according to the auncient tradition of the Iewes, numbred only 22 Canonicall * 1.149 bookes of the old Testament, as we do, and in his Chronicle he sayth expresse∣ly, that the bookes of the Macchabees, are not in the canon.

Reade (saith Cyrill g 1.150 of Hierusalem in his Catechisme) the diuine Scriptures, that is, the 22 bookes of the old Testament: and a litle after, Reade therefore these 22 bookes, but with the apocrypha haue nothing to doe; meditate vpon the diuine Scriptures, which wee confidently reade in the Church: the holy Apostles, the guides of truth, who deliuered vnto vs these bookes, were more wise and religious then thou art. Seing therefore thou art but a sonne; trans∣gresse not the precepts of the Fathers. Now these are the bookes which thou must reade, and then numbreth all the bookes of the old Testament, and o∣mitteth all those that are controuersed;

sauing that hee addeth that of Baruch, thinking it a part of Hieremies prophesies. Of the same opinion is h 1.151 Epipha∣nius, making no mention of any of the bookes reiected by vs as apocryphall, but onely the booke of Wisdome, and Iesus the sonne of Sirach;

which hee saith are profitable, but not to be esteemed as the 22 bookes (or 27 as some count them) that were kept in the arke of the couenant, which are the bookes by vs acknowledged to bee canonicall.

i 1.152 Amphilochius Bishoppe of Iconium, writing to Seleucus hath these words

I will reckon vnto thee all the bookes that proceeded from the holy Ghost; and that thou mayest cleerely conceiue that which concernes this matter, I wil first number vnto thee the bookes of the old Testament, & then he nameth

the 5 bookes of Moses, Iosua, and the Iudges, Ruth, 4 bookes of the Kings, 2 of the Chronicles; 2 of Esdras, Iob, the Psalmes, 3 of Solomon, the proverbes, Ec∣clesiastes, Canticles, 12 Prophets, Hose, Amos, Micheas, Ioel, Abdias, Ionas, Naum, Abacuch, Sophonie, Ha•…•…ge, Zacharias, Malachias, the 4 Prophets Esai, Hieremie, Ezekiel, Daniel, and concludeth that to these some adde Hester. The reason why some doubted of Hester I haue elsewhere shewed, out of Sixtus Se∣nensis, to haue been, the Apocryphall additions to the booke. I haue some where cited this booke as a part of Gregorie Nazianzens workes: because some thinke it so to be, and put it amongst his workes. But k 1.153 Gregory hath deliuered his opinion clearely touching this matter, though that booke happily be not his.

Bee conuersant (saith hee) day and night in the diuine ora∣cles; but least such bookes as are not of this sort, deceiue thee, (for many erro∣neous bookes are inserted:) receiue the true and iust number of bookes that are diuine: and then nameth all the bookes that wee admitte: saue that hee o∣mitteth

the booke of Hester, vpon the same reason that I noted out of Sixtus

Senensis: and when he hath named these, he addeth those of the new testament; and then pronounceth, that whatsoeuer is not within this number, is to bee ac∣counted amongst bastard & counterfeit bookes.

Origen, expounding the first Psalme, putteth downe a catalogue of the holy Scriptures of the old Testament, writing thus in precise words, as l 1.154 Eusebius telleth vs;

Wee must not be ignorant that the bookes of the old Testament, as the Hebrewes doe deliuer, are 22, which is the number of their letters: and then nameth all the bookes admitted by vs, and addeth, that the bookes of Macchabees are without this number. m 1.155 Athanasius agreeth with Origen, writing in this sort: All our Scripture, that are Christians, was giuen by di∣vine inspiration; neither hath this Scripture infinite bookes, but a definite number, and contayned in a certaine canon; and these are the bookes of the old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomie, Iosu∣áh, Iudges, Ruth, the first and second of Kings accounted one booke: the third & fourth of Kings accounted one booke: Chronicles first & second ac∣counted one booke; Esdras the first & second one booke; the Psalmes of Da∣vid 151. Proverbs of Salomon, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Iob, 12 Prophets con∣tayned in one volume, Osee, Amos, Micheas, Ioell, Abdias, Ionas, Naum, Am∣bacum, Sophonias, Aggaeus, Zacharias, Malachias, 4 other Prophets Esai, Hie∣remie, Ezechiel, Daniel; the bookes therefore of the old Testament are 22 in number, answerable to the Hebrew letters; Beside these there are certaine o∣ther bookes of the old Testament, that are not in the canon, and these are read

onely to the Catechumens or Novices: Amongst these hee numbreth the Wisedome of Solomon, the Wisedome of Iesus the sonne of Sirach, Iudith, To∣bit; but mentioneth not the bookes of Macchabees at all; to these he addeth the booke of Hester, accounting it Apocryphall, being misperswaded of the whole, by reason of those Apocryphall additions, as before I noted out of Sixtus Se∣nensis. In the conclusion of his Synopsis he mentioneth together with the former, foure bookes of Macchabees, and the story of Susanna; but, sayth, they are in the number of them that are contradicted.

The councell of Laodicea decreeth in this sort: Let no bookes be read in the Church, but the bookes of the old & new Testament, and then addeth, n 1.156 these are the bookes of the old Testament that are to bee read. Ge∣nesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomie, Iosuah, Iudges, Ruth, foure bookes of Kings, 2 of Chronicles, Esdras, the booke of the Psalmes 150. the Proverbs of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Iob, Hester, 12 Prophets Osee, &c: Esay, Hieremie, Ezekiel, Daniel. The canons of this councell are confirmed by the sixt generall councell holden in o 1.157 Trullo.

To these we may adde p 1.158 Damascene, who hauing numbred all those bookes, and those onely, as canonicall, that wee doe; addeth, that the booke of Wisedome, and of Iesus the son of Sirach, are good bookes, and containe good lessons of vertue, but that they are not numbred in this account, neither were layd vp in the arke. q 1.159 Leontius advoca∣tus Byzantinus sayth, there are onely 22 bookes of the old Testament, & rec∣koneth all those, and those onely, that wee doe.

All these worthies that wee haue hitherto produced to testifie in this case, are of the Greeke Church, where∣fore let vs passe to them of the Latine. r 1.160 Hilary Bishop of Poictiers saith, the law of the old testament is contained in 22 bookes, according to the number of the Hebrew letters; which are so disposed, and put in order, according to the tradition of the auncient, that there are fiue bookes of Moses, that Iosuah is the sixt; the Iudges, and Ruth, the seaventh: the first and second of Kings the eigth; the third and fourth the ninth; 2 of Chronicles the tenth: Esdras the eleventh; Psalmes 12; Solomons Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles 13, 14, 15; the 12 Prophets 16; Esay, Hieremie with the Lamentations and epistle, Da∣niell, Ezechiel, Iob, & Hester, doe make vp the number of 22 bookes; some haue thought good to adde Tobie, and Iudith, and so to make the bookes to

bee 24 in number, according to the number of the Greeke letters.

Ruffinus in the explanation of the Creed, which is found amongst the works of Cyprian, and so attributed to him, setteth downe a Catalogue of those bookes, which according to the tradition of the ancient, are beleeued to haue beene in∣spired by the Holy Ghost, and deliuered to the Churches of Christ, containing all those bookes which we admit, secluding all those that are now in question:

It must be knowne, saith he, that there are other bookes which are not called Canonicall, but Ecclesiasticall, by the ancient: as the Wisedome of Solomon, and that of the sonne of Sirach. And in the same ranke we must put the booke of Tobias, and Iudith, and the bookes of the Machabees: and in the New Te∣stament the booke of Pastor, all which truly they would haue to be read in the Church, but not to be alleadged for proofe of any matter of faith that was questioned, or doubted of; and then concludeth, that hee held it very fit to put downe these things, which were deliuered by tradition from the Fa∣thers, that they that are to learne the first elements and rudiments of Christi∣an Religion, may know out of what fountaines to draw.

s 1.161 Hierome in his prologue, which he prefixed before the bookes of the Old Testament, by him translated out of Hebrew into Latine, saith,

There are 22 bookes of the Olde Testament; and that as there are but 22 Hebrew Letters, by which wee write whatsoeuer wee speake; so there are 22 bookes, by * 1.162 which as by Letters and beginnings in the doctrine of God, the tender in∣fancie of the just man, that yet is like a childe hanging on the breast, is in∣formed and instructed: and then nameth all the bookes which we admit, and after addeth, Whatsoeuer is beside these, is to bee put amongst the Apocry∣pha; and that therefore the book of Wisdome, of Iesus the sonne of Sirach, of Iudith, Tobias, and Pastor, are not in the Canon. And the same Hierome

in his Preface before the Bookes of Solomon, hauing made mention of the booke of Wisdome, and Ecclesiasticus, and deliuered his opinion, that it is vntruely called the Wisdome of Solomon, and attributed to him; then addeth,

that, as the Church readeth the bookes of Iudith, Tobias, and the Maccha∣bees, but doth not account them amongst the Canonicall Scriptures; so these 2 Bookes may bee read for the edification of the people, but not for the confirmation of any doubtfull point of doctrine. t 1.163 Sixtus Senensis con∣fesseth that Philastrius rejecteth the Bookes of Macchabees.

And the same u 1.164 Philastrius in the he heresie of the Prodianitae, taxeth them amongst other things, that they vsed the booke of Wisdome, which Iesus the sonne of Sirach wrote long after Solomons time.

x 1.165 The Authour of the Booke De mirabilibus Scripturae, that goeth vnder the name of Augustine, hath these wordes, De lacu verò & Abacuck translato, in Belis Draconisque fabula, idcirco in hoc ordine non ponitur; quod in authoritate divinae Scripturae non habentur. It is true, that Au∣gustine, and the African Bishoppes of his time, and some other in that age, finding these bookes which Hierome and the rest before cited, re∣ject as Apocryphall, to bee joyned with the other, and together read with them in the Church, seeme to account them to bee Canonicall. Ca∣ietan and others answere, that those Fathers speake of the Canon of man∣ners, not of faith: and of Bookes not simply, hut in a sort canonicall, so that they differ not from the other Fathers before alleadged, that deny them to bee Canonicall, as not being simply, and absolutely so. How fit and true this answer is, I will not stand to examine: but this is most certaine, that Augustine himselfe seemeth something to lessen the authority of this Booke: for whereas the example of a 1.166 Razias killing himselfe, is pres∣sed against him, to prooue that it is lawfull for a man to kill himselfe:

after other aunswers, he saith, the Iewes doe not esteeme this Scripture called the history of Mac•…•…bees, in such sort as the law, the Prophets, and

the Psalmes, to which Christ giueth testimonie as to them that beare witnesse of him, saying, it behoued that all those things should bee full∣filled * 1.167 that are written of mee, in the Lawe, the prophets, and the Psalmes; but it is receaued of the Church not vnprofitably, if it be soberly read, and heard: especially in respect of those Macchabees, that as true martyres, indured grie∣uous and horrible things of the persecutors, for the law of God: And the

councell b 1.168 of Carthage, whereat Augustine was present, prescribing that noe bookes should be reade in the Church as canonicall, but such as indeede are ca∣nonicall, leaueth out the bookes of Macchabees, as it appeareth by the Greeke edition; though they haue foysted them into the Latine.

But howsoeuer these did not soe exactly looke into these things, as they of the Greeke Church, and many of the Latine Church before named, but ad∣mitted those bookes as in a sort canonicall, that they found ioyned together with the other indubitate scriptures, which they had of the translation of the Septuagint: yet after Hierome had translated them out of the Hebrew, and pre∣fixed his prologues and prefaces, before the bookes translated by him; almost all the Bishoppes and men of account in the Latine or West Church, so ap∣proued the same, that they admitted no other bookes as Canonicall, but those that hee did

Pope c 1.169 Gregorie the first, citing a certaine testimonie out of the first booke of Macchabees hath these words:

wee offend not if touching this thing we alleage and produce a testimonie out of books though not canonicall, yet published for the edification of the people. This was the opinion of Pope Gregory, Gre∣gorie

the first, Gregory the greate, our Apostle as they of the Romish faction tell vs, and therefore it will not be safe for vs to leaue the faith first deliuered vnto vs. To the Pope I will adde certaine Cardinalls.

Bonauentura in his preface before his exposition of the Psalter, vndertaketh to shew which are the bookes of Scripture:

Scripture, sayth hee, consisteth of the old and new Testament, and the whole body of canonicall Scripture is contained in these 2; then passing by the bookes of the new Testament, hee reckoneth all those, and those only that Hierome doth:

sorting them into their seuerall rankes and orders, as the Hebrewes do.

And in another place he sayth, d 1.170 there are 4 sorts of writings in which a student must bee conuersant; the bookes of holy Scripture, the writings of the Fathers, such sayings as haue bin gathered out of them, and the writings of Philosophers. And because in the bookes of Philosophers, there is no knowledge to giue remission of sinnes: nor originally in the summes, because they haue bin extracted out of the originalls of the Fathers; nor in them, because they haue been taken out of the Scripture; therefore that is principally and in the first place to be studied, and there wee must seeke that knowledge as in the fountaine; and then, that all may know

which and how many these bookes of Scripture are that hee will haue to bee thus studied,

hee sayth, according to Hierome there are 22 in the old Testa∣ment, and in the new there are eight.

e 1.171 Hugo cardinalis repeateth certaine verses, expressing which bookes are Ca∣nonicall, and which Apocryphall, the verses are these:

Quinque libros Moisi, Iosue, Iudicum, Samuelem, Et Melachim, tres praecipuos, bis sexque Prophetas, Hebraeus reliquis censet praecellere libris. Quinque vocat legem, reliquos vult esse Prophetas. Post hagiographasunt, Daniel, Dauid, Hester, & Esdras, Iob, Paralipomenon, & tres libri Solomonis. Restant Apocrypha, Iesus, Sapientia, Pastor, Et Machabaeorum libri, Iudith, atque Tobias. Hi, quia sunt dubii, sub canone non numerantur:

Sed quia vera canunt Ecclesia suscipit illos.

Here he numbreth the bookes Canonicall and Apocryphall as wee do. And the same Hugo in prologū galeatum, speaking of the bookes reiected by vs saith,

that these bookes are not receiued by the Church for proofe of doctrine, but for information of manners. And in another f 1.172 place he saith, they are not coun∣ted amongst the Canonicall. Cardinall g 1.173 Caietan sayth, those bookes only are to be accounted Canonicall which Hierome so accounted, and admitteth none

of those that are now questioned: this he wrote at Rome as himselfe telleth vs in the yeare 1532.

From the Church of Rome, which was the principall amongst these of the West, let vs proceed to see what other Churches thought of this matter. h 1.174 Tho∣mas Aquinas, proposing the question whether the soules of them that are de∣parted, doe know what things are done here: it being obiected, that the dead do often appeare vnto the liuing, as Samuel appeared vnto Saul: concerning Samuel he answereth

that it may be sayd that he appeared by diuine reuelation, according to that in Eccle siasticus 46. or else, if the authority of that booke be not admitted, because it is not in the Canon of the Hebrewes, it may be sayd,

that that apparition was procured by the diuel.

i 1.175 Antoninus Archbishop of Florence, affirmeth that the authority of the sixe bookes questioned, is not sufficient to proue any thing that is in controuer∣sie, and that Thomas secunda secundae, and Lyranus in his prologue before the

booke of Tobias, do say,

that those bookes are not ofsoe greate authority, that any sufficient proofes may be drawne from them in matters of faith, as from the other bookes. And therefore pronounceth, he thinketh they haue such au∣thority as the writings of the Fathers approued by the Church. And k 1.176 he men∣tioneth

a certaine worke intitled Catholicon, the authors name is not knowne: but the same author, as hee telleth vs, pronounceth,

that none of these books were receiued for proofe of matters of faith, but only for information of man∣ners.

By this of Antoninus, who was present at the councell of Florence, it will easily appeare to be meerely supposititious, that we find in the abridgment of that councell by Caranza, that these bookes were pronounced to be canonicall: for had they bin so, neither would hee nor others haue reiected them after the holding of this councell: neither would such a decree haue bin omitted by all others that put out the councells, at large and abridged.

l 1.177 Radulphus Flaviacensis, in his commentaries vpon Leuiticus, speaking of bookes pertaining to the sacred history, hath these words.

The books of Tobias, Iudith, and of the Macchabees, though they be read for the edification of the Church yet haue no perfect authority.

m 1.178 Beda, after the history of Ezra, ad∣deth; thus farre the diuine scripture containeth the course of times, what things

afterwards wee found digested among the Iewes, they are taken out of the booke of Macchabees, Iosephus, & the writings of Africanus. It appeareth by the

Epistle of Hilarie B. of Arles, that in Massilia & in some other places of France, there were that tooke exception to Augustine alleaging a place out of the booke * 1.179 of Wisdome cap. 4. Raptus est ne malitia mutaret intellectam eius; and af∣firmed, that this testimonie, as not beeing canonicall, should haue beene omitted.

o 1.180 Hugo de sancto victore, hauing reckoned the 22 bookes of the old Testa∣ment, sayth:

there are besides certaine other bookes as the Wisdome of Solomon, the booke of Iesus the sonne of Sirach, Iudith, Tobias, and the booke of Mac∣chabees, which are read, but are not written in the canon: these hee matcheth

* 1.181 in authority with the writings of the Fathers. Richardus de sancto victore, deli∣uereth his opinion of the same bookes in the same sort; and maketh them to be * 1.182 of no greater authority then the writings of the Fathers.

Petrus Cluniacensis abbas, after an enumeration of all the bookes that are canonicall, sayth; there are yet besides these authenticall bookes, 6 other

books not to be rejected, Iudith, Tobias, Wisdome, Ecclesiasticus, and the two bookes of Macchabees; which though they attaine not to the high dig∣nitie of the former, yet they are receiued of the Church as containing profi∣table and necessarie doctrine. Ockam, to the same purpose saith, that ac∣cording to Hierome in his Prologue before the booke of Proverbes: and Gre∣gory * 1.183 in his Moralls, the booke of Iudith, Tobias, and the Macchabees, Ec∣clesiasticus, and the booke of Wisdome, are not to be receiued for confirmation of any matter of faith. For Hierome saith, as Gregory also doth, that the Church readeth the bookes of Iudith, Tobias, and the Macchabees, but ac∣counteth them not amongst the Canonicall Scriptures. So also it readeth those 2 volumes of Ecclesiasticus, and Wisdome for the edification of the peo∣ple, but not for confirmation of points of faith and Religion.

s 1.184 Richardus Radulphus Archbishop of Armach, and Primate of Ireland, saith, it is defined in generall Councels, that there are 22 authenticall bookes of the Olde Testament. t 1.185 Thomas Waldensis Provinciall of the Carmelites heere in

England, an enemy to Wickliff, whose workes were greatly approued by Pope Martin and the Cardinals at that time, hath these wordes:

The length, breadth, and depth of the city are equall; for as in breadth it can enlarge it selfe no farther, then to the loue of GOD and our neighbour: nor in heigth nor depth, then to GOD the rewarder of all; so in length, which is the Catholique Faith, it cannot growe beyond the 12 Articles contained in the Symbole, and found scattered in some of the 22 bookes; especially seeing the Holy Ghost sayth in the conclusion of all Canonicall Scripture, Let him that will, take of the water of life freely. I professe vnto euery one that heareth the words of this prophesie, if any man shall adde, GOD shall adde to his plague.

u 1.186 Lyra writeth thus: Now that I haue by Gods helpe written vpon the Canonicall bookes of holy Scripture, beginning at Genesis, and so going on to the end; trusting to the helpe of the same GOD, I intend to write vpon those other bookes that are not Canonicall; such as are the book of Wisdome, Ecclesiasticus, Iudith, Tobias, and the bookes of Macchabees: and ad∣deth, that it is to bee considered that these bookes which are not Canoni∣call, are receiued by the Church, and read in the same, for the information of manners, yet is their authority thought to bee too weake to proue things that are in controversie. And writing vpon the first of Esdras, 1. c. he saith, that though the bookes of Tobias, Iudith, and the Macchabees, bee histori∣call bookes, yet he intendeth to pasle them ouer: because they are not in the Canon, neither with the Iewes, nor with the Christians. x 1.187 Tostatus Bishop of Abulen, approueth the judgment of Lyra.

Ximenius that was made a Cardinall in the time of Leo the 10^•, put forth the Bibles called Biblia Com∣plutensia; and in the Preface before the same, treating of the bookes by vs

thought to bee Apocryphall, hee sayth, they are not in the Canon; and that the Church readeth them rather for edification of the people, then to confirme any doubtfull points of doctrine: and that therefore they are not Canonicall.

Dionysius Carthusianus in his Prologues before the bookes of Ecclesiasticus, and Tobias, denyeth them to bee Canonicall: as also the booke of Iudith: and writing vpon the first Chapter of Macchabees, hee denieth it to bee Canoni∣call. a 1.188 Ludovicus Vives, treating of History sacred and prophane;

now come in, sayth hee, the bookes of Kings, and the Chronicles, the Apocry∣phall bookes of Hester, Tobias, and Iudith; Esdras, which being divided into foure bookes, the two first are accounted Canonicall by the Hebrewes, the two latter are Apocryphall. And in b 1.189 another place, speaking of the History of Susanna and Bell: he putteth them amongst the Apocrypha. With these ac∣cordeth c 1.190 Driedo.

To these may bee added the Glosses: The ordinary Glosse, was begun by Al∣cuinus, as Antoninus Florentinus, & d 1.191 Gaguinus doe thinke; or by Strabus, Fuldensis, as Trithemius & e 1.192 Sixtus Senensis thinke: but it was afterwards in∣larged by diuerse, which gathered sundry sentences, and sayings, out of the wri∣tings of the Fathers, and put them into it. This Glosse grew to bee in great request, and vsed in all Churches of the West. In the preface thereof are

these words: There are some bookes canonicall, some not canonicall; betweene which there is as great difference, as there is betweene that which is certaine, and that which is doubtfull. For the canonicall bookes were composed by the immediate direction and suggestion of the holy spirit; they that are not canonicall, are very good and profitable, but their autho∣ritie is not reputed sufficient to proue the things that are questionable. This

the authour thinketh so cleere, that hee fastneth the note of ignorance vpon

all such as thinke otherwise; and professeth, that therefore he held it necessa∣rie to prefixe this preface, because there are many, who not giuing them∣selues much to the study of holy Scripture, suppose that all those bookes that are bound vp together in the Bible, are to bee in like sorte honoured and esteemed; not knowing how to put a difference betweene bookes canonicall, and not canonicall, which the Hebrewes separate from the canon, and the Greekes account apocryphall; and so oftentimes make themselues ri∣diculous

to them that are learned. Hee citeth the authority of Origen, Hie∣rome, and Ruffinus, rejecting the six bookes questioned; and though hee knew the opinion of Augustine, yet doth hee not follow it, onely hee sayth, that

amongst the bookes not canonicall, they that are reiected by Augustine, as Baruch and the third and fourth of Esdras, are lesse to bee esteemed, then those

that hee alloweth. And immediately after this preface, followeth Hieromes epistle to Paulinus, and afterwards, his prologus galeatus; and his prologue before the bookes of Solomon. And the glosse every where inculcateth, when it commeth to these six bookes, that they are not canonicall. Incipit liber Tobiae, &c. Heere beginnes the booke of Tobias which is not canonicall: &c. In the edition of the Bibles with the Glosses there is found an exposition of the prologues of Hierome; written and composed by Brito, more auncient then Lyra, for hee is cited by f 1.193 him,: and honoured with the title of a famous and worthy man, who professeth that the bookes questioned are not cano∣nicall.

g 1.194 Gratian in the decree maketh no mention of the opinion of Gelasius, touch∣ing the canonicall Scriptures, disliking, as it seemeth, his opinion, and yet not willing to oppose against it. But the h 1.195 Glosse vpon the next distinction saith;

there are certaine apocryphall bookes that is without authour, as the Wise∣dome of Solomon, the booke of Iesus the sonne of Sirach, called Ecclesiasti∣cus, the booke of Iudith, the booke of Tobias, and the bookes of the Maccha∣bees; these bookes are sayd to bee apocryphall, and yet they are read but hap∣pily

not generally. i 1.196 Driedo citeth this place of the glosse, and reprehendeth the authour of it, as not giving the true reason why these bookes are called apocryphall, but yet thinketh as hee doth, that they are apocry∣phall.

Sanctes Pagninus, in his epitome of historicall bookes that are canonicall, pre∣fixed before the Bible, translated by him into Latine, accounteth all those that Hierome doth, to be canonicall; the rest hagiographall. Bruciolus, in the preface of his commentaries vpon the Bible, translated by him into Italian, saith, he hath commented vpon all the bookes of the old testament, & yet hee hath not com∣mented vpon the six bookes that are questioned. In the Bibles put out at Antwerpe, by Arias Montanus, with the interlineall translation, all those bookes are omitted. In the edition of the Bible printed at Antwerpe by Birkmannus, that very yeare that the councell of Trent was holden, to de∣termine

this point, touching the Canonicall and Apocryphall Scriptures and the like: the author, suppressing his name, prefixeth a preface before the same his edition: and in it reiecteth all the bookes now questioned, in more peremp∣tory sort, then many of the former did.

Here wee see a cloud of witnesses, in all ages, and in all parts of the world, witnessing to the truth of that wee affirme, touching the canon of the Scrip∣ture, and reiecting those bookes as Apocryphall, or not Canonicall, which wee reiect, euen till and after the time of Luther: soe that the Church where∣in our Fathers liued and died is found as I sayd, to bee in this point a Pro∣testant Church: wherefore let vs proceed to other particular points of con∣troversie.

CHAP. 2.

Of the sufficiencie of the Scripture.

THat the Church formerly did not deny the sufficiencie of the Scrip∣ture for the direction of Christian men in matters of faith and religi∣on, as the Romanists now doe; but acknowledged and taught, that it containeth all things necessary to salvation, accordingly as wee now professe, it appeareth by the testimonies of these diuines a 1.197 Gregorius Ari∣minensis, sometimes Prior generall of the friars Heremites of the order of Saint Augustine, writing vpon the sentences, hath these words:

That is properly a theologicall discourse, that consisteth of sayings or propositions contained in the holy scripture, or of such as are deduced thence, or at the least of such as are consequent, and to bee deduced from one of these: this sayth hee, is proued, ex communi omnium conceptione; nam omnes arbitran∣tur

tunc solum theologicè aliquid probari, cum ex dictis probatur sacrae scrip∣turae, out of the common conceipt and apprehension of all men:

for all men doe thinke that then onely a thing is proued theologically, when it is proued out of the sayings of holy Scripture: and if wee distinguish theo∣logicall conclusions, from principles theologicall, I affirme that all those verities that are not formally and in precise words contained in holy scripture, but are necessarily deduced from things soe contained in it, are conclusions theologicall, whether they bee determined by the Church or not: for the Church determineth that a proposition is to bee beleeued

precisely, because it seeth, it is necessarily deduced from the words of holy Scripture: but no other that is not so deduced, is to be accounted a the∣ologicall

conclusion: which is proued out of the sayings of Saint Augu∣stine in his fourteenth booke de Trinitate cap. 1. where hee sayth, hee doth not conceiue, that all that, that may bee knowne by man in hu∣mane things, pertaineth to this science, but those things onely where∣by the most wholesome faith, that leadeth to true happinesse is begot∣ten, nourished, defended, and strengthened: but it is euident, that eue∣ry such thing, is either expressely and in precise tearmes contained in holie scripture, or is deduced from things soe contained in it: for otherwise, the Scripture should not bee sufficient to our saluation, and the defense of our faith, which is contrary to Saint August: 2 de doctrinâ Christianâ where hee sayth, Quicquid homo extra didicerit, si noxium est ibi dam∣natur,

si vtile, ibi inuenitur: that is, whatsoeuer a man shall learne with∣out

and beside the scripture, if it bee hurtfull, it is there condemned, if profitable it is there found. Here wee haue a pregnant testimonie,

of a man of eminent place, and great worth, peremptorily resoluing

for the sufficiencie of the Scripture, and assuring vs, that this was not his priuate conceipt, but the generall opinion of all men in his time, and be fore.

b 1.198 Scotus agreeth with Ariminensis, his words are these, Whatsoeuer per∣taineth

to the heauenly and supernaturall knowledge, and is necessary to bee knowne of man in this life, is sufficiently deliuered in the sacred Scriptures; and in c 1.199 another place, Sicut theologia beatorum habet terminum, ita & nostra ex

voluntate Dei revelantis: terminus autem praefixus â voluntate divinâ, quantum ad revelationem generalem, est eorum quae sunt in sacrâ scripturâ: quia sicut habe∣tur Apocalyp. ultimo, Qui apposuerit ad haec, apponet ei Deus plagas quae ap∣ponuntur in libro isto; igitur theologia nostra de facto non est nisi de his quae conti∣nentur in scripturâ, & de his quae possunt elici ex ipsis; that is,

As the Theolo∣gie of those blessed ones that are in heauen hath a certaine bound, without, and beyond which it extendeth not it selfe; so also that theologicall know∣ledge that wee haue, hath bounds set vnto it by the will of God, that re∣vealeth divine and heauenly trueth vnto vs, and the bound prefixed by the will of God, who generally will reveale no more, is within the com∣passe of such things, as are found in the holy Scripture; because, as it is in the last of the Revelation, whosoeuer shall adde vnto these things, GOD shall adde vnto him the plagues that are added in this booke.

d 1.200 Ockam in his Dialogues saith;

There is one opinion, that onely those verities are to bee esteemed Catholique, and such as are necessarily to bee beleeued for the attaining of saluation, which either expressely are deliuered in Scripture, or by necessary consequence may bee inferred from things so ex∣pressed; and that they that follow this opinion, alleadge sundry authorities for proofe of the same, as that of Augustine: Ego solis scripturarum libris

* 1.201 didici hunc timorem, honoremque deferre, ut earum nullum authorem in aliquo er∣rasse firmissimè credam, &c. alios autem ita lego, ut quantalibet sanctitate, quan∣tave doctrinâ polleant, non ideo verum putem quia ita ipsi senserint, sed quia per alios authores canonicos, vel probabiles rationes, quod à vero non aberrent, mi∣hi persuadere potuerunt.

I haue learned to giue this honour and reverence onely to the bookes of Scripture, as that I should beleeue that none of the authors of them in ought haue erred, &c: But others I so reade, that how great soeuer their sanctitie and learning bee, I doe not therefore thinke that to bee true which they haue written, because it was their opinion, but because they are able to perswade mee, either by some other canonicall Authours, or by probable reasons, that they haue not erred from the trueth. And in another place; Quis nesciat sanctam scriptu∣ram

* 1.202 canonicam tam veteris quàm noui testamenti certis terminis suis conti∣neri, eamque posterioribus omnibus Episcoporum libris praeponi, ut de illâ omninò dubitari & disceptari non possit, vtrum verum vel utrum rectum sit quicquid in eâ scriptum esse constiterit: Episcoporum autem literas, quae post confirmatum canonem; vel scriptae sunt, vel scribuntur, & per sermo∣nem fortè sapientiorem cuiuslibet in eà re peritioris, & per aliorum Episcopo∣rum graviorem auctoritatem, doctioremque prudentiam, & per concilia re∣prehendi licere, si quid in iis forté à veritate est deviatum?

Who knowes not that the holy Canonicall Scripture, as well of the Olde as the New Te∣stament, is contained within it's certaine bounds: and that it is pre∣ferred before all the Bookes of Bishoppes that haue beene written since: so that there may bee no doubt made, nor dispute raised concerning it, whether whatsoeuer is certainely knowne to bee registred in it, bee true or right. But that the letters of Bishoppes, which either haue beene or are written since the confirmation of the Canon, may bee repre∣hended if in any thing they haue strayed from the trueth, both by the

speech perchaunce wiser, of some one better skilled in that matter, and by the more graue authority & more learned wisedome of other Bishops, and by ge∣nerall

councells. And Hierom; Quod de Scripturis authoritatem non habet eâ∣dem

facilitate contemnitur quâ probatur: That which hath not authority and confirmation from the Scriptures is with like facility rejected as it is vrged.

Others hee sheweth to bee of a contrary opinion; but being pressed to giue in∣stance of things necessarily beleeued, and yet not contayned in the Scripture, they giue no other but certaine matters of fact; as that the Apostles composed the Symbol called the Apostles creed, that Peter was at Rome, & things of that nature.

Ockam in this place deliuereth not his owne opinion, but only reciteth the contrary opinions of other men: but in another place, inveighing against the Canonists, & going about to proue that it principally pertayneth to diuines, to define, & determine, what is catholicke, and what hereticall; after many con∣vincing

reasons, hee addeth this in the conclusion. g 1.203 The defining of things in this kinde, pertayneth principally to the professors of that science, to which nothing may bee added, and from which nothing may bee detracted; but of this sorte is the profession of diuines; and therefore Moses sayth in the per∣son of God Deuteronomie 4. Yee shall not adde vnto the word I speake vnto you, neither shall yee take from it: to which that of Solomon answereth, Pro∣verb. 30. where speaking of the word of God, hee sayth: Adde nothing to his words, least thou be reproved, & found a liar: And hence it is that the holy Ghost doth terribly threaten by Iohn the Evangelist, in the last of the Revela∣tion, all them that adde or take any thing from the holy Scripture; saying, If any man shall adde more then this, God shall adde vnto him the plagues that are in this booke, and if any man shall take any thing from the words of the Prophesie of this booke, God shall take his part out of the booke of life, and out of the holy city. By all which it is euidently collected, that nothing is to bee added to the holy Scripture, nor nothing to be taken from it.

h 1.204 Cardinall Cameracensis agreeth fully with Ariminensis before cited; for first hee distinguisheth principles, and conclusions theologicall; principles he maketh to be the verities of the sacred canon; conclusions to bee those verities which are not sound formally, and in expresse words, or precise tearmes, in Scripture, but may necessarily be deduced from things so contayned; whether they bee articles, or not; whether they bee determined by the Church, or not

determined: and then pronounceth, that that onely is a theologicall discourse which consisteth of sayings and propositions contayned in the sacred Scrip∣tures, or of such as may bee deduced from them, and that then onely wee say a thing is theologically proued, when it is concluded out of the words of holy Scripture.

To these wee may adde i 1.205 Waldensis, his words are these, That Wickliffe af∣firmeth, that neither Friars nor Prelates may define any thing in matters of

faith, vnlesse they haue the authoritie of sacred Scripture, or some speciall re∣velation, I dislike not, but I condemne his way wardnesse & craft, and thinke it necessary least we wrest the Scriptures & erre in the interpretation of them, to follow the tradition of the Church, expounding them vnto vs, and not to trust to our owne private & singular conceipts. ^• Gerson acknowledgeth as * 1.206 much as the rest: his wordes are these: What evils, what daungers, what confusions haue followed the contempt ofsacred Scripture, which is suffici∣ent for the government of the Church, or else, Christ was an imperfect law∣giuer,

experience will teach vs. The authour of that most pious and worthy worke called l 1.207 Destructorium vitiorum hath sundry things for confirmation of

this poynt: As, sayth hee, corporall things here below may in some sorte bee known, without the benefit of corporall light: for one may know the length, breadth, and other dimensions of such a thing, and may in the darke discerne,

whether it bee long or short, but whether it bee faire or foule, white or black, wee cannot certainely know: So it is in things that are to bee discerned intel∣lectually, for though Philosophers excelling in mundane wisedome, & lacking the light of faith, had some kinde of knowledge of God, as that hee is the be∣ginning & cause of all things, yet could they not know how faire, how good, how mercifull, and how glorious hee is: neither did euer any man knowe it; but either by diuine revelation, or by the information of the holy Scripture; so that the holy Scripture is that light, by which in this state of wayfaring men, wee may haue sufficient knowledge of all things necessary to saluation: whence it is, that the Psalmist sayth: Thy word is a lanthorne to my feete, & a light to my steppes. But as experience doth teach, that hee that will bee lighted by the light of a candle, must haue the candle before him, and must follow it: but that if hee shall cause it to bee brought after him in the darke∣nesse of the night, it will not giue him light to any purpose: so they that walke in the darkenes of this life, if they desire to be lighted by the candle of Gods word, and to direct their goings in the way of trueth without falling, they must haue the light of Gods word before their eyes, and must follow it by well doing. But even as, if a candle be carried out in the darkenesse of the night, where bruite beasts, as horses and the like, are, they will runne from it: whereas birds will come towards it: So bestiall men that are like horses & mules, flie from the light of the Scriptures, according to that of Iohn. 3. Every one that doth euill, hateth the light, neither doth hee come to the light, least his workes should bee reproued.

For confirmation of that hee sayth, hee alleadgeth a most excellent discourse

of Bishop m 1.208 Grosthead: who intreating of that history in the 1 Kings. 19. where the Angell of the Lord sayd to Elias, goe forth and stand in the mountaine before the Lord, and hee stood and saw, and behold a winde passed by him, o∣verthrowing the mountaines, and tearing the rockes in sunder, but the Lord was not in the winde: and after the winde an earthquake, but the Lord was not in the earthquake: and after the earthquake fire, but the Lord was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voyce, and there was the Lord: shew∣eth that God is not found in any other science, but in the holy Scripture only which is giuen by diuine inspiration: and for farther illustration hereof no∣teth, that there were three wels digged by Isaak, Genesis, 26. For he digged the first, and the Philistins stroue for it: likewise the second, and they clay∣med it also: wherefore hee left them both, and digged a third, which hee peaceably enjoyed, and called the name of it Robooth, that is, latitude, because the waters of it were inlarged: and to the first of these wells, hee compareth naturall sc•…•…ences, to wit, the seaven liberall arts, as logicke, in which there is much brawling & contending: to the second, such science as wee learne for gaine sake, and to get preferment, as is the knowledge of humane lawes, ac∣cording to those verses.

Dat Galenus opes & sanctio Iustiniana. Ex aliis paleas, existis collige grana.

To the third hee compareth diuine knowledge, and sayth, that that well was rightly named Robooth, that is, latitude, because the waters of it were inlarged: So the heavenly doctrine was published to all parts of the world by the Apo∣stles, and other faithfull preachers, according to that of the Psalmist, Their sound is gone forth into all the earth: and the Lord inviteth his elect to come and drinke the waters of this well, saying, all yee that are thirsty come to these waters; and the wordes of Christ moue all earnestly to thirst after these wa∣ters, when hee sayth, Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteous∣nes: but the vngodly having tasted of the wine of mundane joy, and temporall riches, hate, dislike, and put from them this water, and therefore the Lord sayth well of them by the Prophet Esay: 8. Because this people haue refused

the waters of Siloe that runne softly and without noyse, and haue taken rather Rasin and the sonne of Romelia, I will bring upon them the mighty waters of of the floud. Siloe is interpreted sent, and it signifieth the doctrine of the diuine Law, sent vnto vs by Christ, the Apostles, and other faithfull ones, which doctrine the Pastors of the Church are bound vnder the paine of dam∣nation to know and teach; whereupon Isidore saith, de summo bono lib. 3. c. 46. The Priests shall bee damned for the iniquity of the people, if either they ne∣glect to teach them being ignorant, or to reproue them when they offend, the Lord hauing said by the Prophet, I haue set thee as a watch-man ouer the house of Israel, and if thou shalt not tell the wicked of his wickednes, that hee forsake his euill way, he shall dye in his iniquitie, but I will require his bloud at thy hand. Notwithstanding all this, many of the moderne Priests cast from them this learning, and say, we will none of it, because it is not de pane lucrando, that is, it serueth not to bring in gaine and profite; and giue them∣selues to the study of humane lawes, which are not so necessary for the sauing of soules as the law of God: because as Odo saith here vpon the Gospell, ser∣mone 39. If Christ had knowne, that we might more easily attaine saluation by the Lawes of Iustinian, he would surely haue taught them vs with his own mouth, and haue let that alone which he taught vs, and deliuered vnto vs, et in

quâ continetur implicitè, vel explicitè, omnis scientia ad salutem necessario requi∣sita,

and in which is contained expressely or implicitely all knowledge ne∣cessarily required to saluation, according to that of S. Augustine 2. de doctrinâ Christianâ in fine. Whatsoeuer a man learneth without and beside the holy Scripture, if it be hurtfull it is there condemned, if it bee profitable it may there be found. But many Church-men leaue this learning, and take vnto them Rasin, and the sonne of Romelia; Rasin signifieth a picture; and Romelia, high and mighty thunder, so that by Rasin, and the sonne of Romelia wee may vnderstand painted and glorious wordes, and that wordy thunder of humane lawes, which kindes of learning many Ecclesiastical persons assume, that they may be by such profession exalted in the courts of great Lords; and for this cause, as the Prophet addeth, the Lord shall bring vpon them the migh∣ty and great waters of the floud, that is, infernall punishments, so saith

Odo.

Hitherto hee hath alleadged the words of Grosthead and Odo. In n 1.209 another place he saith concerning them that so contemne the word of God, that the

Lord complaineth of such by the Prophet Ierem. 2. saying, My people hath done two euils, they haue forsaken me the fountaine of liuing water, and haue digged to themselues broken cisterns, to which, as Gulielmus Parisi∣ensis saith, the decree or canon law may fitly be compared, which is a broken cisterne that cannot hold water, which though it haue water to day, shall haue none to morrow, because it shall bee abrogated: whereas touching the Law of God it is otherwise: and therefore the Psalmist saith: thy righteousnesse, O Lord, is an euerlasting righteousnesse, and thy law is trueth. Yet is the holy Scripture much contemned by the profession of the Canonists; so that the knowledge of holy Scripture, and profession of Divinity, may say to an ill Advocate, or Lawyer, as Sara said to Abraham, in the 16 of Genesis: Thou dealest ill with me: I gaue thee my handmaid into thy bosome, who seeing that she had conceiued, despised me: for, as Gulielmus Parisiensis saith, de vitiis part. 4. cap. 6. The profession of Canonists contemneth the profession of Di∣vines, and science of holy Scripture, because they are not so gainefull, as it is. When Ismael and Isaack played together, Ismael mocked Isaack, so that Sar•…•… was forced to intreate Abraham to cast out the bondwoman and her sonne. So happily it were behoofefull and profitable for the Church, that this Science in a great part should be cast out; because it not only contemneth the diuine Sci∣ence, and Law of God, but blasphemeth it: and in so doing contemneth and

blaspheameth God himselfe, who is the lawgiuer.

Here wee haue the opinion of three worthy men touching the sufficiencie of the Scripture, and the dangers, confusions, and horrible euils, that followed vppon the multiplying of humane inuentions. Many more might be alleadged to the same purpose; but these may suffice to let us know what the doctrine of the Church was in the dayes of our Fathers; for they deliuer not their priuate conceipts, but tel vs what all good and iudicious men conceiued of these things in their times.

But some men will say, wee find often mention of traditions in the writers of former ages, soe that it seemeth, they did not thinke the Scriptures to con∣taine all things necessary to saluation. For the clearing of this doubt, wee must obserue that by the name of tradition, sometimes, all the doctrine of Christ and his blessed Apostles is meant, that was first deliuered by liuely voice, and afterwards written. Sometimes the deliuering of the diuine and canonicall bookes from hand to hand, as receiued from the Apostles, is named a tradition. Sometimes the summe of Christian religion contained in the Apostles creed, which the Church receiueth as a rule of her faith, is named a tradition; but euery one of those articles is found in the Scripture, as Walden∣sis rightly noteth, though not together nor in the same forme; so that this co∣lection may rightly be named a tradition, as hauing beene deliuered from hand to hand in this forme, for the direction of the Churches children; and yet the Scriptures be sufficient. Sometimes by the name of traditions the Fathers vn∣derstand certaine rites and auncient obseruations; And that the Apostles deli∣vered some things in this kind, by word, and liuely voyce, that they wrote not, wee easily grant; but which they were, it can hardly now be knowne, as Wal∣densis rightly noteth. But this proueth not the insufficiencie of the Scripture; for none of those Fathers speake of points of doctrine, that are to be belieued with∣out and besides the Scripture, or that cannot be proued from thence; though sometimes in a generall sort, they name all those points of religion, traditions, that are not found expressely, and in precise tearmes, in Scripture, and yet may necessarily be deduced from things there expressed. Lastly by the name of tradition, is vnderstood the sense and meaning of the Scripture, receiued from the Apostles and deliuered from hand to hand together with the bookes.

There are, saith o 1.210 Cassander, 3 sorts of traditions; for some concerne the doctrine of faith, others rites and ceremonies; and a third sort, things done. They that concerne rites and ceremonies, are variable according to the diffe∣rent circumstances of times; they that are historicall, are for the most part vn∣certaine and are not necessarie to saluation: they that are dogmaticall are cer∣taine and perpetuall: but p 1.211 by dogmaticall traditions wee vnderstand, not any diuine verity not written, or any point of doctrine not contained in the Scripture, but such points of doctrine, as though they are not found in precise termes in holy scripture, yet are deduced from the same rightly vnderstood, and interpreted; as the Apostles did vnderstand, and expound them to their hearers, and they to such as came after them. So that this tradition is nothing else but the explication and interpretation of the Scripture: and therefore it may be sayd not vnfitly, Scripturam esse implicatam quandam & obsignatam

traditionem, traditionem vero esse Scripturam explicatam & resignatam. that the

Scripture is a kind of tradition inuolued and sealed vp: and that tradition is Scripture vnfolded, explained, and opened. This is that, which q 1.212 Vincentius

Lyrinensis long since deliuered, to wit, that the Scripture is sufficient, and con∣taineth

all things necessary to be known of a Christian man, for the attaining of saluation: but that for the auoiding of the manifold turnings of heretickes, peruerting the same to their owne perdition, wee must carefully looke to the tradition of the Church, deliuering vnto vs the true sense and meaning of it.

By this which hath beene sayd, it appeareth, that the Church wherein our Fa∣thers

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

liued and died, was, in this poynt touching the sufficiencie of the Scrip∣ture, an orthodoxe and true Protestant Church, as it was in the former, touch∣ing the canon of the Scripture.

CHAP. 3.

Of the originall text of Scripture, of the certainety and trueth of the origi∣nalls, and of the authoritie of the vulgar translation, I haue discoursed at large in my fourth booke, and the 27. 28. chapters of the same; and made it appeare, that the principall and best learned divines, at, & since Luthers time, taught no otherwise touching these poynts then wee now doe, so that I need not insist vpon the proofe hereof.

CHAP. 4.

Of the translating of the Scripture into vulgar languages, and of the necessity of hauing the publique liturgie, and prayers of the Church, in a tongue vn∣derstood.

TOuching the translating of the Scriptures, it is evident, that both aun∣ciently, and of late time, they haue beene translated into the severall languages, of almost all the countries and kingdomes of the whole world, where euer Christianity prevailed. a 1.213 There is extant a tran∣slation of the old & new testament in the Armenian tongue, which the Arme∣nians now vse, put forth, as they suppose, by Chrysostome: of this, George the patriarch of Alexandria maketh mention, in the life of Chrysostome; reporting, that when by the Emperours decree, hee was sent in banishment into Armenia, and stayed at Cucusum, hee brought the inhabitants of that region to the faith of Christ; and caused the Psalmes of David, together with the holy gospells, and other histories of the old Testament, to bee translated into the Armenian tongue; that so the people of that countrey, might the sooner and more easily attaine the knowledge of holy Scripture. And b 1.214 Theodoret testifieth that the holy Scriptures were translated into the Armenian tongue before his time, though hee name not the authour.

The Slavonians affirme, that they haue the Scriptures in their vulgar tongue, turned by Saint Hierome; and Hierome himselfe, in his epistle to Sophronius, seemeth to some learned men to intimate so much. But yet there is another translation also of the Scriptures into the Slavonian tongue, later then that of Hieromes, as c 1.215 Scaliger hath obserued, written in the Servian character, & vsed in Rascia, Bosina, Bulgaria, Moldavia, Russia, Moscovia, and other nations, of the Slavonian language, that celebrate their liturgies after the Greeke cere∣monie; of which later Methodius the companion of Cyrill is reported to haue beene the authour. The former imputed to Hierome, is written in the Dal∣matian character, and is vsed amongst the Liburnians, and Dalmatians, Istri∣ans, Moravians, Silesians, Bohemians, Polonians, &c.

Vulphilas the Goth, (of whom d 1.216 Socrates maketh mention in his ecclesia∣sticall historie) who liued in the yeare 370, first found out the Gothicke alpha∣bet, and first of all deliuered to the Gothes all the diuine Scriptures, translated * 1.217 by him out of Greeke into the Gothicke tongue; and catholiquely expounded them, striving much against the Arrians; yet in the end, as Theodoret repor∣teth, he declined to the part of Valens the Arrian Emperour, moued so to doe by the threates and promises of Eudoxus the Arrian.

Neither were the Scriptures translated onely into these languages, but into the languages of many other nations, as f 1.218 Chrysostome and g 1.219 Hierome affirme: and in particular into the Aegyptian, Persian, Indian, Scythian, and Sarmatian tongues; and into the languages of all other nations that receiued the Christian

faith, as h 1.220 Theodoret telleth vs. As likewise in the times following, we read of the like translations of the Scripture, into sundry languages of such Nations, as were afterwards converted to the Faith, or whose languages after altered. So i 1.221 Iohn Archbishop of Sivill about the yeare 717, translated it into the Arabique, which then was the vulgar speech of that part of Spaine. And k 1.222 Beda about the same time some part of it, into the Saxon or English. l 1.223 Methodius about the yeare 860, into the Slavonique; Iacobus de Voragine, Archbishop of Ge∣nua, about the yeare 1290, translated the whole diuine Scripture into the Itali∣an tongue, and so did Bruciolus in our age. m 1.224 About 200 yeares since the whole Bible was translated into French, in the time of Charles the 5^th; and as the Rhe∣mists tell vs, in their preface before the New Testament by them translated in∣to English, since Luthers time, diuerse learned Catholiques haue published the Bible, in the seuerall Languages of almost all the principall provinces of the Latine Church; so that the Papists themselues doe not simply condemne the translating of the Scripture into the vulgar tongues. * 1.225

But there are some amongst them, as o 1.226 Stapleton telleth vs, who out of zeale

rather then knowledge, doe thinke the Lay people should bee wholly restrai∣ned from reading the Scriptures in vulgar tongues: others more moderate and discreete then these (as they would bee thought) are of opinion that all are not to bee restrained, nor all permitted to reade them, but some certaine onely. And therefore the p 1.227 Rhemists tell vs, that order was taken by the Deputies of the q 1.228 Councell of Trent in this behalfe, and confirmed by su∣preame authority, that the holy Scriptures, though truely and Catholiquely translated into vulgar tongues, yet may not be indifferently readde of all men, nor of any other then such as haue expresse licence thereunto by their lawfull ordinaries, with good testimony from their Curates or Confessours, that they are humble, discreet, and devout persons, and like to take much good, & no harme thereby. This was the decree of Pius 4: but Clement the 8^th, in a later edition of the same Index, with new additions, r 1.229 saith, that this power of permitting Lay-men to haue the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue, was taken away by the mandate, and practise of the Roman Church, and of the generall inquisition, so that they may not permit any to haue the whole Bible in the vulgar tongue, or any parts of the Olde or New Testament, or any summa∣ries or epitomies, though historicall of the same Bibles; and this hee pre∣scribeth

to be inviolably kept. Thus doth he condemne the practise of all the Churches of God, which had the Scriptures translated into vulgar Languages; (for to what end should they be translated, if no man might vse them?) and together with them his Predecessour Pius the 4^th, and all the learned Prelates that concurred with him; and falleth into the folly or indiscretion which Stapleton condemneth, as wee heard before. Thus variable and vncer∣taine are these Romane Bishoppes, who yet would bee taken not onely to bee built vpon the Rocke, but to be that Rocke vpon which the Church is builded, against which the gates of hell cannot prevaile.

But, as Stapleton telleth vs, in the place aboue cited, There were certaine

Catholique and great men, (and in the margent hee nameth Sir * 1.230 Thomas More) who thought it fit, as tending to the honour of God, and saluation of the people, to deliuer vnto them the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue, with∣out any restraint, leauing it free to all to read them that will; for that so many good and godly Christians who would receiue great comfort, and be much e∣dified thereby, are not to be depriued of that most excellent benefite, which they may haue by reading them, in respect of few or many vnlearned or vnstable men, who depraue the scripture to the perdition of themselues and o∣thers, as S. Peter saith in his 2 Epistle cap. 32. No more then it had beene fit that Christ the Lord, should haue forborne to come and saue others, in respect of such wicked ones, to whom his comming is a rock of offence, & a stone to

stūble at: or that he that is the true light, that lighteneth euery man that cōmeth

into the world should therefore haue kept him selfe away, or not appeared to the world, because men loued darkenes more then light; And surely if the vul∣gar

free and ordinary reading of the scripture, were to be denied and restrained, in respect of the wicked who abuse it, the scripture must neuer haue bin in the Hebrew, Greeke, or Latine tongues; for all these tongues were vulgar to the Iewes, Grecians, and Romans; This opinion Stapleton confesseth to be probable and godly, and yet he disliketh it.

And yet it is confirmed by the authority of the Fathers, who earnestly ex∣hort the people to the reading of the scripture, as a thing necessary to salua∣tion. Soe doth Chrysostome, in sundry places, 2 Homily vpon Mathew. b 1.231 3. * 1.232 Homily vppon Lazarus. c 1.233 3. Homily vpon the second to the Thessalonians. d 1.234 28. Homilie vpon Genesis. 9. Homilie vpon the Epistle to the Colossians, where he sayth, the Apostle commandeth secular men that are married to reade the scrip∣ture; and whereas S^t Paul to the Colossians 3. hath these words, Let the word

of Christ dwell plentifully in you in all wisdome, teaching and admonishing your selues in Psalmes, hymmes and spirituall songs, Chrysostome in his ninth

Homily and Hierome in his commentaries vpon the same place, collect, and in∣ferre, that the Scriptures are to be reade of Lay men, and that by the precept of the Apostle. It is therefore vntrue, that e 1.235 Stapleion hath, that Chrysostome doth not exhort the people to the reading of the scripture, as a thing necessary, but as fitte and profitable for them, that liued idlely in a rich citty, thus to oc∣cupy them selues; as if it had beene onely to keepe them from doing nothing, that they were to reade the booke of God. Neither is it any better, that he hath in answere hereunto, that Chrysostome spake not exactly, but as a preacher or oratour; as if in the pulpit a Preacher might exhort the people with all earnest∣nesse, to that which is not fitte to be done; or as if there were not many now adayes, that liue idlely in rich cities.

From the translating of the Scriptures into vulgar tongues, and the peoples priuate reading of the same, let vs come to speake of the publike liturgy of the Church, and the common praiers in the vulgar tongue. Here I will first shew what the practice of the Church hath beene; and secondly, what the opinion of Iudicious men is and hath beene touching this point: That in the Primitiue Church they had the seruice in the vulgar tongue, it is euident by the testimo∣nies of the auncient. For first f 1.236 Origen writing against Celsus, and answering that calumniation of them that said, Christians vsed certaine barbarous words and names of God, in their prayers, supposing vertue to be in them, more then in Greeke or Latine words, or names; telleth them, there is no such thing: but

that they that are true and right Christians, in their prayers vse not the names of God found in the Scripture written in Hebrew; but the Grecians vse greeke words; the Latines, latine: and all pray, and praise God, in their own tongue; &

he that is the Lord of all tongues heareth thē, in what tongue soeuer they pray: and vnderstandeth them speaking in so different languages, no lesse then if they all vsed one language.

Bellarmine saith, in the time of the Apostles the whole people was wont to

answere Amen in the celebration of diuine seruice, and not as now by one ap∣pointed in their steed: For Iustin Martyr testifieth expressely in his 2 apology that the whole people was wont to answere amen, when the Priest ended his prayer or thankesgiuing; and it is euident that the same vse was continued a long time after, both in the East and West, as it appeareth by the liturgy of Chrysostome, where the things that were to be sayd by the priest, deacon, and people, are distinctly set downe. And by Cyprian in his sermon vpon the Lords

prayer: where he saith, the people doe answere, we lift them vp vnto the Lord,

when the priest willeth them to lift vp their harts, and by Hierome praefat: lib. 2. in epist. ad Galatas, who writeth that in the Churches of the city of Rome the

people are heard with so loud a voyce, sounding out amen, as if it were a thundring from heauen. Thus farre Bellarmine in his 2 booke de verbo Dei,

chap. 16: which argueth that they had their seruice in a knowne tongue, for o∣therwise how could they thus haue answered to the seuerall parts of the diuine seruice as they were appointed to do: surely the long answeres of the people to the priest in their praiers, found in sundry * 1.237 liturgies are a demnostration that it was so.

u 1.238 August. de chatechizandis rudibus, hath these words. Let them know, that there is no other voyce that entreth into the eares of God, but the affection of the minde: and then they will not deride the prelates and ministers of the Church, if hap∣pily they discerne any of them to vse barbarismes, or solecismes, in the inuocation of God, or not to vnderstand the words they pronounce, nor aptly and distinctly to vt∣ter them: not as if these faults were not to be amended, that so the people might an∣swere amen, to that which plainely and distinctly they vnderstand: but that they should learne louingly to beare with these defects, hauing learned, vt sono in foro, sic voto in ecclesiâ benedici: and that forensis illa nonnunquam fortè bona dictio, nun∣quam tamen benedictio dici potest.

x 1.239 The Aethiopians or Habassines anciently had, and still haue the common praiers, & whole liturgie, in their own vulgar tongue, into which language y 1.240 Sa∣bellicus reporteth, that both the old and newe Testament were translated out of the Chalde. The Armenians haue their diuine seruice in the Armenian tongue, as 1 1.241 Iacobus à vitriaco, 2 1.242 Brocardus, 3 1.243 Michouius, 4 1.244 Breitenbachius, and ma∣ny others, partly out of their own knowledge and partly from certaine relation haue recorded. The 5 1.245 Moscouites and Russians haue their seruice in their vul∣gar language, which is a kind of Slauonian, intermingling sometimes certaine greeke hymnes: the epistle, and gospell, that the people may the better heare and vnderstand, are read with a loud voyce without the quier, in the middle of the Church. Neither haue those Russians only their seruice in the vulgar, that are subiect to the great Duke of Mosco, but they also that are subiect to the King of Polonia. 6 1.246 The Nestorians haue their seruice in a degenerate Chalde, or Syriack, and so haue the 7 1.247 Indians from which their vulgar differeth very little. The Iacobites of Mesopotamia, Babylon, Palestine, Syria, and Cyprus, haue their liturgie in the Syriaque tongue, (and it is that which is called 8 1.248 anaphora Basilii as it is thought) which though it be not well vnder∣stood by their common people (their vulgar, as now it is, differing something from it,) yet that it was commonly vnderstood, when that liturgie was first ordained, it appeareth by the long answers of the people to the priest, in their prayers which wee find in it. The Maronites likewise haue their seruice in the Syriaque, their vulgar being the Arabique. As also the Aegyptians haue their seruice in the same bastard Chaldee or Syriaque, their vulgar being the Arabique: but these first reade the Gospell in Chalde & afterwards in Arabique.

a 1.249 Marianus Victorius Reatinus saith, that as the Chalde tongue dependeth of

the Hebrew, and groweth out of it, so the Syriaque, Arabique and Aethiopian tongues haue dependance on the Chalde, and are growne out of it, so that they

also haue the name of the Chalde: and these fiue tongues haue such agreement

amongst themselues, and are soe like, that hee that perfectly vnderstandeth

* 1.250 one, may in a great part vnderstand the other. And therefore it is not to bee maruailled, if all these Churches last mentioned haue their ser∣uice in the Chaldee or Syriaque: for it is in a sort their mother tongue, and noe doubt was perfectly vnderstood by them, when their liturgies were first devised. The Georgians, Circassians, and Mengrellians, are sayd to

haue their seruice in Greeke; and so are the Syrians, or Melchites, but if that Liturgie which Andraeas Masius translated out of the Syriaque, and which is found in the 6 Tome of Biblioth. Patrum, and is named Anaphora Basilii, bee theirs, then surely they celebrate not in Greeke.

But to leaue these Easterne Churches, and to come to those that are nearer to vs; wee may diuide all the Churches of this part of the world into three sorts; For some of them aunciently vnderstood and spake Latine, as they did in Augustine's time in those parts of Africa wherein he liued, and therefore it is not to be marvailed at if they had their Liturgie in the Latine tongue, for they vnderstood it better then the Punique: so that hee preached vnto them in Latine. That generally they vnderstood and spake Latine, it is evident by that which b 1.251 Augustine saith of himselfe: Latina didici sine ullo metu, atque cruciatu, inter etiam blandimenta nutricum, & ioca arridentium, & laetitias alludentium. That is, I learned Latine without any feare or vexation, whiles the nurses sought to please me, while men sported and played with mee. In another place, hee hath these wordes. c 1.252 Proverbium notum est Punicum, quod quidem Latinè vobis dicam, quia Punica non omnes nostis: That is, The Pu∣nique Proverbe is knowne, which I will vtter vnto you in Latine, because you doe not all vnderstand the Punique tongue: whereby it appeareth, that the Latine tongue was better vnderstood in some parts of Africa, then the Pu∣nique. The Latine tongue was also vulgar in Italy, in France, and Spaine; for when they receiued the Romane Lawes, they learned the tongue also, and beganne to speake Latine, though their owne tongue were not presently extinct. So that it is not improbable but that they had their seruice in La∣tine; but whether they had, or not, it is evident they had it in a tongue they vnderstood.

For touching France, d 1.253 Severus Sulpitius writeth, in the life of Martin, that when there was no little difference about his election, the Lector whose course it was to reade that day, inclosed in the multitudes, was kept out from the place, and could not performe that duety: whereupon the Ministers being troubled, while hee came not that was looked for; one of them that stood by, tooke the Psalter, and reade that verse, that hee first found; and the Psalme was this: Our of the mouthes of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained praise, that thou mayst destroy the enemy, & defensorem, and the de∣fender; which, when the people heard, they made a great shout, and that part that was opposite to Martin, was confounded, for the principall man that opposed him was named Defensor, and the people thought that it was by Gods speciall direction, that this Psalme was reade, to put downe the faction that opposed against Martin. By this it appeareth, that the Scripture was reade in Latine, and yet in a tongue vnderstood by the people; for otherwise how could they haue beene thus af∣fected?

And that it was so read in auncient times, as to bee vnderstood, it is cleare by the forme of blessing, vsed in the constituting of Lectors, which was this, as it appeareth by an olde manuscript cited by e 1.254 Cassander: Bene∣dicere dignare hos famulos tuos, in officium lectorum, ut assiduitate lectionis sint apti pronunciare verba vitae, & mentis ac vocis distinctione populo mon∣strare intelligibilia: That is, Vouchsafe to blesse these thy servaunts

designed and appointed to the office of Lectors, that by the daylie and ordinary vse of reading, they may bee fitted to pronounce to the people the wordes of life, and with distinction both of vnderstanding and voice, to shew vnto the people the things they reade, so as that they may bee vnderstood of them that heare them. And in the f 1.255 Pon∣tificall

wee finde these wordes directed to the Lectors, Studete verba Dei videlicet lectiones sacras, distinctè, & apertè, ad intelligentiam, &

aedificationem fidelium, absque omni mendacio falsitatis, proferre.

That is. Bee yee carefull to vtter, publish, and rehearse the words of God, to wit, the sacred lessons, distinctly, and clearely, to the vnderstanding, and edification of the faithfull without all lying, falsehood, and vntrueth.

How generally they vnderstood and spake Latine in Spaine heretofore, it may appeare by their present language, a barbarisme of Latine; as also by the lawes the Gothes gaue vnto them, called the Gothique Code, written in good Latine; And by Lucan, Seneca, and sundry other principall lights of the Latine tongue. So that g 1.256 Marineus Siculus feareth not to say, that if the Gothes and Moores and other barbarous nations, had not come into Spaine, the Spaniards woud still haue spoken as good Latine, as the Ro∣mans did in the time of Tullie. So that it is not vnlikely but that the Spaniards aunciently had their service in Latine; but whether they had or not, it is evident they had it in a tongue vnderstood, by that wee reade in h 1.257 Isidore. Oportet vt quando psallitur, psallatur ab omnibus; cum lectio legitur, facta silentio aequè audiatur á cunctis.

That is, It is fitte that when the singing beginneth, all should sing; when the lesson is read, there being a generall silence kept, all should equally, and in one and the same sorte

hearken to that which is read; And againe; Ideo & diaconus clarâ voce si∣lentium admonet, vt siue dum psallitur, siue dum lectio pronunciatur, ab om∣nibus vnitas conseruetur, vt quod omnibus praedicatur, aequaliter ab omnibus

audiatur. That is, And therefore doth the deacon also with a cleare and lowd voyce call vpon all to keepe silence; that aswell when the singing is, as when the lesson is read, all may doe one and the same thing, that all may heare that which is pronounced equally to all.

Some other parts there were that had not such vse of the Latine tongue as these had; who having Alphabets, and characters of their owne; so that they could write & expresse things in their owne tongues, had the whole liturgie and diuine service, in their vulgar tongue; Of this sort were all those nations, kingdomes, and people, that speake the Slavonian tongue, i 1.258 which was the language of more then the third part of Europe: besides the Mengrellians, Circassians and Gazarites in Asia. The k 1.259 characters of this language are of two sorts, for there is the Servian character, and the Dalmatian. All the Christians of Rascia, Bosina, Servia, Bulgaria, Moldavia, Russia, Moscovia, and all other nations of the Slavonian language in the Easterne parts, that cele∣brate their liturgies after the Greeke ceremonie, and professe obedience to the Patriarch of Constantinople, haue the Scriptures in their owne tongue tran∣slated as it is sayd by Methodius, the companion of Cyrill, in preaching the gospell to Gentile nations, and written in the Servian character, as also their liturgies are. l 1.260 The Dalmatian characters are in vse in Dalma∣tia, Liburnia, Istria, Moravia, Silesia, Bohemia, Polonia, &c.

It is a receiued opinion, that Hierome first devised the Dalmatian cha∣racters, and translated the Scriptures into the Dalmatian tongue; but it seemeth that in processe of time his translation was neglected, the La∣tine service brought in, and those characters out of vse; For m 1.261 A∣ventinus reporteth, that Methodius hauing found out * 1.262 letters, and tran∣slated the Scripture into the Slavonian tongue, perswaded the Dalma∣tians to explode the Latine tongue, to hisse out the Roman rite or cere∣monie, and make vse of their owne tongue in the holy service of God.

n 1.263 Eckius confesseth that heretofore the diuine seruice was in the Dal∣matian tongue throughout all Illyricum.

The priests of Liburnia, sayth o 1.264 Aventinus, which in this our age is subiect to the Arch∣duke of Noricum, are yet still ignorant of the Roman tongue, and doe

say their diuine service in their owne, that is, in the Slauonian tongue. And

p 1.265 Iohannes Baptista Palatinus, sayth, the Slauonians and those of Illyricum haue

their service and common prayers in their vulgar tongue, and all the peo∣ple vnderstand it as wee doe our natiue language. Auentinus sayth, that

Methodius went into the kingdome of Boiaria, and sought to perswade the inhabitants of Liburnia, Noricum, Pannonia, and Veneda, to abandon the * 1.266 Latine, and to haue their seruice in the vulgar; but Richoualda the Bishop, and Adeluinus the Archbishoppe of Salsburge, and the priests of * 1.267 〈◊〉〈◊〉 which successiuely had gouerned the Churches in those parts, for the space of 85 yeares, according to the decree of Charles the great; resisted him, and forced him to flie into Morauia. But afterwards that which he attempted tooke effect as it appeareth by Auentinus in the words before cited; for they of Libur∣nia had their seruice in the vulgar in his time.

s 1.268 Hosius confesseth, that the seruice in the vulgar tongue was in Bohemia & Po∣lonia, and that there were some liuing when hee wrote, that might remember, when in Clepardia in the temple of S^t Crosse the priests said seruice in the vul∣gar or Slauon tongue. t 1.269 Cromerus sayth that the two Bishoppes Methodius, and Cyrillus, did good seruice in bringing the people of those parts to the knowledge of God in Christ, and that they caused the Slauonians to haue their seruice in their owne tongue, the Pope giuing assent and approuing that they did. And the same u 1.270 Cromerus sayth, the seruice was in the Slauon tongue in Croconia.

That the Morauians had the seruice in their owne tongue wee haue proofe sufficient, for Iohn the eight tooke precise order, and commanded it should be soe. His x 1.271 Epistle written to the Prince of Morauia is extant, in which epistle he hath these words. Whereas one Constantine a Philosopher found out letters

and characters of the Slauon tongue, that so in it they might sound forth the praises that are due to God; wee exceedingly commend the same, and do com∣maund that the praises of Christ our God and his workes be vttered and set forth in the same; for wee are admonished to praise God not in three tongues only but in all, by the sacred authority that commanded saying, Praise the Lord all yee Gentiles, and praise him together all people, Psalme 117.. And the Apostles being filled with the holy Ghost spake in all tongues and vt∣tered the great and wonderfull workes of God Act: 2. Hence also Paul, that heauenly trumpet, soundeth forth and exhorteth every tongue to con∣fesse, that our Lord Iesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father: concer∣ning which things he admonisheth vs sufficiently, and manifestly, in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, requiring vs no otherwise to speake with tongues, but soe, that wee may edifie the Church. Neither is it contrarie to the right faith and sound doctrine, to sing masse in the same Slauon tongue, or to reade the holy Gospell, or the diuine lessons of the old or new Testa∣ment, rightly translated and interpreted, or to sing all other parts of di∣uine seruice, appointed for certaine houres and times; because that hee that made 3 principall tongues, to wit, the Hebrew, Greeke, and Latine, created also all other, for to set forth his praise and glory. Notwith∣standing wee command, that in all the Churches of your country the Gospell be first reade, for the greater honour, in Latine; and afterwards the translation into the Slauonian tongue, in the hearing of the people that vnderstandeth not Latine; as it seemeth the custome is in some Churches; and if it seeme good to thee and thy iudges, and great men, to heare masse rather in La∣tine, wee command that the masse bee celebrated for thy selfe and them in

Latine.

y 1.272 Aenaeas Syluius, afterwards Pius the second, reporteth that Cyrill, hauing

brought Suatocopius to become a Christiā, & to be baptized, won the Mora•…•…, and sundry other nations of the Slauonians, to Christianity: & afterwards being

at Rome, besought the Pope, that with his good liking hee might say seruice in the Slavonian tongue, to the people of that Nation, whom he had baptized; concerning which thing when there was no little dispute in the sacred Senate, and many disliked this motion, there was suddainly heard a voice, as it had beene from Heauen, saying, Let euery spirit praise the Lord, and let euery tongue confesse vnto him, whereupon the Pope yeelded to his motion, & gaue consent that he should doe as he desired.

There is no doubt, but that there were many crossings in this kinde, and that sometimes they had the seruice in one tongue, and sometimes in another, not onely in diuerse countreyes, but euen in the same accordingly as the dif∣ferent factions prevailed. Vuratizlaus Duke of the Bohemians desired of Pope Hildebrand, that he would giue consent that they might say divine seruice in the Slavon tongue, and it seemeth by the Popes answere, it had bin so before, as in other places, so here; for he z 1.273 sayth, neque ad excusationem iuvat, quod qui∣dam religiosi viri, hoc quod simplicitèr populus quaerit, patienter tulerunt, seu incorrectum dimiserunt, cum Primitiva Ecclesia multa dissimulaverit, quae à sanctis Patribus postmodum firmatâ christianitate, & religione crescente, sub∣tili examinatione correcta sunt.

That is, neither doth it serue to excuse, and make good this petition, that some religious men patiently endured and suf∣fered that to be done, that the people simply desired, or that they let it alone vncorrected, or altered it not, seeing the Primitiue Church was content to winke at diuerse things, which the holy Fathers afterwards, when Christia∣nity was firmely settled, and Religion increased, vpon diligent and exact examination, thought good to correct and alter. a 1.274 Walafridus Strabo testi∣fieth,

that in his time the divine seruice was still celebrated in the vulgar Ger∣mane tongue, amongst certaine Scythian Nations, especially those that are cal∣led Tomitani, and that certaine Germans doe inhabite in those parts.

There was a third sort of people to whom the Gospell was preached, that were so * 1.275 rude and vnlettered at the time of their conversion, that they knew not how to write any thing in their owne tongue, hauing no characters or let∣ters of their owne, nor any monuments of antiquity, or report of things past, but in the Latine tongue: these could haue no forme of divine seruice deliuered vnto them at the first in their owne tongue. So that happily to some in this case, the Booke of God was at first deliuered in Latin, to be expounded by such as vnderstood it, to them that vnderstood it not: not as thinking it best so to haue it in a tongue not vnderstood, but because they could not doe otherwise. And therefore Iohn the 8^th, vnderstanding that they of Moravia had an alpha∣bet & characters, so that they could expresse things in writing, commaundeth thē to haue their seruice in the Slauonian tongue. And so in those places where they could not haue the booke of God in the vulgar tongue at the first, yet so soone as they had meanes, they caused the same to be put into the vulgar.

And therefore b 1.276 it is reported that Ludovicus the Emperour, hauing a great care of Religion, and seeking the saluation of his subjects soules, whereas till that time the people of Germany, that vnderstood nothing but the Theudiscall tongue, could not read the Scriptures, but the learned onely, hauing now met with one Otfridus, a learned and holy Monke, commaunded him to * 1.277 translate the Old & new testament into the German tongue, quatenus non solum liteteratis, verumetiam illiteratis, sacra divinorum praeceptorum lectio panderetur, that so the

sacred reading of the divine precepts might be made cōmon to the learned & vnlearned: which worke he took in hand, & perfected, at the Emperors com∣maund,

very willingly, hauing bin moued & admonished from aboue so to doe, & it was approued by Luidbertus Archbishop of Mentz. If the Index of prohi∣bited bookes had beene out, which Pius 4. first, & Clement the 8^t since, publi∣shed to the world, the Emperour, Archbish. Translator, & people vsing the tran∣slation, had incurred grievous censures, and had beene branded as Heretickes.

But this poynt of the new religion of Rome, was not then knowen, and there∣fore as they could, in all parts of the world, they translated the Scriptures into the vulgar tongue.

Whether the Saxons at the comming of Augustine into England, could write any thing in their owne tongue, it is much doubted, and many thinke they could not: so that happily the Bible was not deliuered to them in the vul∣gar at the first; but afterwards when they knew how to write in that tongue, it was. For, as we reade, c 1.278 Beda translated a part of it into the Saxon tongue. d 1.279 And the same Beda reporteth, that before his time there was a certaine brother, in the monasterie of the Abbesse Hilda, who hauing receiued excellent grace of God, was wont to make poems, fit to set forward religion & pietie; so that whatsoeuer he learned by interpreters out of the holy bookes, the same things presently after hee would expresse in verse, in his owne tongue, that is, in En∣glish, most sweetely, and so as that he would peirce the hearts of such as heard him; and therefore the abbesse commaunded, that hee should bee taught the whole series and course of the holy historie, that he might expresse the same in his owne tongue: and so he did, for whatsoeuer by hearing hee could possibly learne, he turned into most sweete poems, so that his teachers became his hea∣rers; for he composed poems & songs, concerning the creation of the world. and the beginning of mankinde, the whole historie of Genesis, Israels going out of Aegypt, and entring into the land of promise, and sundry other histories of holy Scripture; of the incarnation, passion, resurrection, and ascension of Christ into heaven, of the comming of the holy Ghost, the doctrine of the A∣postles, the terrour of the future iudgement, the feare of hell punishment, and the happinesse of the kingdome of heauen: and sundry other benefits and iudg∣ments of God. In all which hee sought, to draw men from delighting in things that are euill, to the loue and practise of that which is good. Which poems no doubt were written, if they knew how to write at that time. Thus were they willing in those dayes, to take all occasion to make the Scripture knowen to the people, as farre forth as possibly they might.

And therefore it is not to bee doubted, but that when they had the Scripture onely in Latine, yet it was interpreted to the people, that they might vnder∣stand

it, according to that of Iohn Billet, e 1.280 in summâ de diuinis officijs; In the primitiue Church no man was permitted to speake in a tongue not vnder∣stood, vnlesse there were one to interpret: for to what purpose were it for a man to speake & not to be vnderstood? truely to none at all. Hence grew that laudable custome in some parts of the Church, that so soone as the gospell should bee read in the Latine, it should presently be expounded to the people

in the vulgar. And this which hee sayth is confirmed, by the authoritie and testimony of f 1.281 Epiphanius; who describing all the severall orders in the Church, amongst others hee reckoneth them that were, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. That is, Interpreters that expressed in one tongue, that which was vttered in another, aswell when the lessons were read, as when the preacher spake to the people.

By all that which hath beene said, it appeareth, that the desire of Gods Church was ever, to communicate the Scriptures and bookes of God, to all people in the tongue they vnderstood; That the most part of the Christian Churches, had the booke of God in their owne tongue; And that if any had not, it was either because they could not tell how to write any thing in their barba∣rous tongues: or because the tongue, wherein they first receiued them, altering, they were not vnderstood then, as formerly they had been of their ancestours, to whom they were first deliuered in the same. So in Italy, France, & Spaine, aunciently they generally vnderstood and spake Latine, and therefore had the Scriptures deliuered vnto them in that tongue; but in time the Latine which they spake was so corrupted, and so degenerated into barbarisme, that the peo∣ple

of those parts vnderstood very little, of that which was written in the pu∣rer Latine formerly vnderstood; and therefore in processe of time they were forced to haue the Scriptures newly translated, into this new dialect, or rather corruption of the Latine. So had they the Bible translated into Italian, French, and Spanish, as before I shewed.

Their prayers and liturgies indeede were not altered; yet was there never a∣ny iudicious man, that thought it fittest, to haue the service of God performed without vnderstanding; but all the best & most pious in every age, thought it necessary by all good and possible meanes to prouide, that the people might haue their seruice of God, in a tongue they vnderstood. Wee haue heard alrea∣dy Iohn Billet peremptorily affirming, that in the primitiue Church no man was permitted, to speake in a tongue not vnderstood, vnlesse there were one to interpret; and that it was the custome of some Churches, so soone as the gospell was read in the Latine, to expound the same in the vulgar tongue:

but, saith he, g 1.282 What shall wee say of our times, wherein scarce, or not at all, ei∣ther he that readeth, or heareth, vnderstandeth what hee heareth or readeth? So that wee may say truely, as the Prophet sometime complayned, The priest shall bee as one of the people: Videtur ergo tacendum potius esse quam psallen∣dum,

it seemeth therefore it were better to keepe silence then to sing.

Haymo a worthy and learned Bishop, writing vpon the h 1.283 1 Epist. to the

Cor. hath these wordes, If hee that vnderstandeth onely that tongue, wherein he was borne and bred, stand by thee, when thou solemnly celebratest the mysterie of the masse, or makest a sermon, or powrest forth the wordes of blessing, how shall hee answere amen to thy blessing, not knowing what thou sayest? that is, how shall he answere that confirmatory word, amen, when he * 1.284 vnderstanding onely his owne tongue, knoweth not what thou sayest in that barbarous tongue? And least any man should take advantage, and vrge, as the

Papists are wont to doe, that because he speaketh of a barbarous tongue, his words are not to bee vnderstood, of him that speaketh in one of the three lear∣ned tongues, hee sheweth, that he that speaketh in the Hebrew tongue, to him that vnderstandeth nothing but Greeke, or in the Greeke, to him that vnder∣standeth nothing but Latine, or in Latine, to him that vnderstandeth nothing but Greeke, is a barbarian. Yea if a Roman, and such a one, as is not a Grecian, pronounce the symbol or creed in Greeke, hee is a barbarian to him, that vnder∣standeth nothing but Latine, though hee bee of the same nation, and people.

i 1.285 Thomas Aquinas mentioneth this, but giueth another interpretation of the word, but not so fit; making them to bee barbarians, that excell in strength of body, but are defectiue in strength of reason, which how farre wide it is from the scope of the Apostle, a blinde man may see. But in the same place, proposing the question, how hee that vnderstandeth no other tongue, but that of the country wherein he was borne, can conforme himselfe and say, amen, to the prayers he vnderstandeth not; his answere is, that hee may comforme him∣selfe in a generality, but not in particular, seeing hee knoweth not in particu∣lar, what it is that the minister sayeth, though in generall hee know that hee prayeth, or blesseth. And farther, asking why the prayers and blessings are not in the vulgar, that more fully & particularly the ignorant might conforme themselues vnto the same; his answere is; that happily it was so in the primi∣tiue Church, but now that the faithfull are instructed, and knowe what it is they heare in the service of the Church, the blessings are in Latin; How weake an answere this is to proceed from such a man, who seeth not? for when hee sayth they know what they heare, either hee meaneth in particular, and then hee contrarieth his former wordes; or onely in generall; and then, they can giue no consent, but in generall: and so the question is not answered, why the prayers and blessings are not in the vulgar, that so being distinctly vnderstood, there might bee a distinct conforming to the same.

Lyra writing vpon the same place hath these wordes.

When a Lay man saith the Lords prayer, or any other, devoutly, his affection is lifted vp toGod;

reficitur affectus, non intellectus: sed quandò intelligit, reficitur affectus, & intelle∣ctus:

and this the Apostle sheweth to be true in respect of the publique pray∣ers, because if the people vnderstand the prayer or blessing of the Priest, meli∣us reducitur in deum, & devotius respondet Amen. And then proceeding to those words, If thou blesse, &c. hath these words, What shall hee doe that sup∣plieth the place of the vnlearned? Which words import as much, as what doth it profite the simple people that vnderstand not? as if he should say, litle or nothing, because they know not how to conforme themselues, to him that is the minister of the Church, by answering Amen, and that for this cause in the Primitiue Church, the blessings and all other things pertaining to the pub∣lique seruice of God, were in the vulgar tongue; but after that people were multiplyed and increased, and they had now learned to conforme themselues to the Priest, by standing when the Gospel is reade, and by adoring the Eu∣charist, the seruice was in Latine, and that it sufficeth now, that the Clearke doth answere for the whole people.

Here is confession, that the people profiteth litle or nothing, when the prai∣ers and blessings are in a tongue they vnderstand not; that therefore the Pri∣mitiue Church had the seruice in the vulgar; that while it is in Latine they can∣not themselues, but another must answere Amen for them; and that yet, now they haue learned by standing or kneeling, differently to conforme them∣selues to the Priest, according to the different things he doth; (which a deafe man that neuer heard word, may doe by obseruation of the eye) it is well enough.

But Cardinall Caietan vpon the same place hath these words:

Out of this doctrine of the Apostle Paul, it may be gathered, that it were better, & more for the edification of the Church, to haue the publique prayers that are reade in the hearing of the people, pronounced in a tongue common to the cleargy and people, and vnderstood of them both, then in Latine. k 1.286 And when hee

was challenged by the Parisians for saying, it were better to haue the prayers said in the Church in the vulgar, rather then in the Latine tongue; his answere was, that they recited not his words fully: for he had not said, it were better, but it were better for edification, nor that the prayers should be said, but that the publique prayers should be said in the vulgar tongue; and this his assertion, hee said, was grounded vpon the authoritie of the Apostle.

l 1.287 Cardinall Contarenus, proposing the question, what is to bee thought of such prayers as ignorant men make without vnderstanding, answereth, that it is to be conceiued that they are of force, in respect of the affection of the mind, and intention they haue to pray vnto God, though they know not what they desire, or pray for; but that they want the fruit which they should haue, if they vnderstood those prayers that they vtter with their mouthes: for then they would direct the intention of their mindes, and their desires to God, for the obtaining in particular of such things as with the mouth they pray for; and they would bee more edified, by the pious sense and vnderstanding of their prayers; And he concludeth, that they pray not in vaine, but that they would pray better, if they vnderstood the meaning of their prayers. And to the same purpose m 1.288 Harding against Bishop Iuell, saith, it were better the peo∣ple

should say their prayers in their owne tongue, that they might the better vnderstand them.

n 1.289 Innocentius the 3^d seemeth to haue had due consideration hereof, & therfore

he prescribeth, that, because in sundry parts there are mixed within the same city or diocesse, people of different languages, hauing in the vnity of the same faith, different rites and manners; the Bishops of such Cities or Diocesses, shall prouide fit men to celebrate divine service, according to the diversities

of their rites and languages, & to minister the sacraments of the Church vnto

them, instructing them both by word, and example. Some restraine the words of Innocentius to the Greeke and Latin tongues only, as if he had only allowed the hauing of the seruice in different tongues, in those citties and places, where Greeks and Latines met. * 1.290 But I see not why these words should be thus restrai∣ned; seeing there is no question but this Pope would allow that which Iohn the 8^• his predecessour & others had don, in permitting, nay in cōmanding the ser∣uice to be in the Slauonian tongue. And besides, how he could say that the Greeks in some parts of the world agreed with the Latines in the faith, whom he so bit∣terly reproueth for very maine differences in religion, and who as Thomas à Iesu testifieth most stiffely hold their owne religion, though they liue vnder Princes of the Roman profession, I know not.

Wherefore to grow to a conclusion, it appeareth that anciently all Churches, & that euer most of the Christian Churches, had their seruice in a tongue vul∣garly vndestood; that if any had not, it was either because they knew not how to write any thing in their owne tongue; or because that which was their natu∣rall tongue ceased to be so, after they first had the seruice in it; that many had soe in the West Church when Luther first shewed his dislike of Romish errors & abuses: that there neuer wanted worthy diuines, B^s & Praelates of great esteem, who vrged the vnfitnesse, of hauing it in a tongue not vndestood, & the necessi∣ty of the vulgar; that all in whom there was any sparke of grace, sought to haue it vnderstood; And therefore as I noted before out of Iohn Billet, sundry Chur∣ches though they had their seruice in Latine, yet caused the same things that they read in Latine to be expounded in the vulgar; others, as the B^s in the third o 1.291 councel of Tours, that such things should be read to the people in the vulgar, as might informe & instruct them, in all points of Christian faith & religion: their words are these. We all with vnanimous cōsent haue thought fit to ordain, that

euery B. shall prouide and haue homilies containing necessary admonitions, that so they that are vnder him, may be taught: our meaning is, that these homi∣lies

shall containe instructions touching the catholike faith, according to their

capacities, concerning the euerlasting rewards of the good, & eternall damna∣tion of the wicked, the resurrection & last iudgment, & such works & course of life, whereby men may attain, or whereby they are sure to be excluded from e∣ternall life. And we ordaine, that euery B. take care, to translate the same homi∣lies, plainely and perspicuously, into the vulgar Roman or German tongue, that all may the more easily vnderstand the things that are vttered vnto them.

Among other articles proposed in the councell of Trent by the Embassadors of Ferdinand the Emperor, cōcerning the necessary reformation of the Church,

one was, that p 1.292 Happily it were to be permitted, that in some places, prayers faithfully translated into the vulgar tongue, might be intermingled with those things that are sung in latine. Likewise in the articles of reformation exhibited

to the councell of Trent, by Charles the 9^•. q 1.293 In sacrificio paraecialibus Euangelium apertè & dilucidè & pro populi captu copiose ex suggestu exponatur, quo in loco quae plebano praeeunte fient preces linguâ fiant vernaculâ, peractâ autem re diuinâ latine & mysticis precibus, lingua etiam vernacula publicae ad Deum preces fiant. & ibi∣dem plura. Which thing if it had bin granted by the councell, no new nor strang thing had bin brought in, for as r 1.294 Hosius testifieth, the Church neuer forbad, to

sing in the Churches in the vulgar tongue, in time and place.

It were to be wished, sayth Erasmus, that the whole service of God, might be

celebrated and performed, in a tongue vnderstood of the whole people, as in auncient times it was wont to bee, and that all things should bee soe plainely and distinctly sounded out, that they might bee vnderstood of all that list to * 1.295 attend. And t 1.296 Cassander, fully agreeing with Erasmus, and alleadging to this

purpose the Popes permitting of it to the Slauonians vpon the hearing of a voice frō heauen, & the authority of Caietan, sayth; It were to be desired that ac∣cording

to the mandate of the Apostle, and the auncient custome of the Church, consideration might be had of the people in the publike praiers of the

Church, and in the hymnes and lessons, which are there read and sung for the peo∣ples sake; and that the ordinary and vulgar sort of beleeuers, might not for ever bee wholly excluded, from all communion of prayers and diuine readings: and hee ad∣deth; that vnlesse there bee a reformation in this and other things, there is no hope of any durable peace or consent of the Church: and professeth, hee cannot see but that they to whom the government of the Church is committed, shall one day giue an account, why they suffered the Church to bee thus miserably disquieted and rent in sunder, and neglected to take away the causes, whence heresies & schismes do spring, as in duety they should haue done. So that in this poynt as in the former, we see the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died was a true Protestant Church.

CHAP. 5.

Of the three supposed different estates of meere nature, grace, and sinne: the difference betweene a man in the state of pure and meere nature, and in the state of sinne; and of originall sinne.

THey of the Church of Rome at this day imagine, that God might haue created a man in the state of pure nature, or nature onely, aswell with∣out grace, as sinne; a 1.297 and that in this state of pure or meere nature, without any addition of grace, hee might haue loued God aboue all, and haue kept all the commaundements of God collectiuely, so as to breake none of them, at the least for a short time, though happily hee could not haue holden on constantly so to keepe them all, as neuer to breake any of them: see∣ing there would haue beene a contrariety, betweene reason, and that appetite that followeth the apprehension of sense, in that state of pure or meere nature. So that, according to this conceipt, grace was added not to inable man to loue God aboue all, to keepe the severall cōmaundements, which hee hath giuen, & to doe the workes, of morall vertue, (For all these hee might haue beene able to performe, out of the power of nature, without any such addition,) but to make him able constantly to keepe all the commaundements of God collectiue∣ly, so as neuer to breake any one of them, and to keepe them so as to merit e∣ternall happines in heauen.

Hence they inferre diverse things: First, that the losse of grace or originall righteousnes, that was given to Adam, doth not depriue those of his posteri∣ty of the power of louing God their Creator aboue all, of keeping his com∣maundements divisiuely, and doing the seuerall workes of morall vertue, though happily not with that facilitie, that in the state of grace hee might haue done them. Secondly, That Infidels and such as haue no fellowship with the Saints & people of God, nor any part in his grace, may decline sinne, and doe the workes of morall vertue. Thirdly, That all the contrariety that is found in the powers of the soule, the rebellion of the inferiour faculties against the su∣periour, the pronenesse to euill, and difficultie to doe good, would haue beene the conditions, of meere nature without addition of grace or sinne, and conse∣quently, that they are not sinne in the state wherein wee are; that these evills are not newly brought into the nature of man by the fall; that as man would haue beene mortall in the state of meere nature, because compounded of con∣traries, so out of the contrariety of sensitiue and rationall desire, hee would haue found a rebellion in himselfe, of the inferiour faculties against the superi∣our; that as a heauy thing falleth not downeward while it is stayed, but falleth so soone as the stay is taken away, by reason of the same nature it had, while it was stayed, and as a ship that lay quietly while it was stayed with an anchor, vpon the remouing of the same is driuen with the windes, yet in no other sort then it would haue beene before, if it had not beene stayed; so all these contra∣rieties,

differences, and pronenesse to desire things contrary to the prescript of right reason, would haue beene in meere nature as the conditions of it, & would haue shewed themselues if grace had not hindered them; and that there is no other difference betweene a man in the state of pure or meere nature, and in the state of originall sinne, then there is betweene a man that neuer had any cloa∣thing, and him that had, but by his owne fault and folly is stript out of all; be∣tweene whom there is no difference in the nature of nakednesse, but all the dif∣ference standeth in this, that the one is in fault for not hauing cloathes, the o∣ther not so. For they suppose man would haue beene carried as strongly to the desire of sinfull things, in the state of pure nature, as now, that freewill is not made more weake, then in that state it would haue beene, nor the flesh be∣come more rebellious then it would haue beene without grace, before the en∣trance of sinne.

This opinion ^• Bellarmin followeth, and professeth, that though some of ex∣cellent * 1.298 learning thinke, that both Thomas, and the best and most approued of the schoolmen, were of a contrary iudgment, yet they are deceiued in so think∣ing, and that this is the opinion of them all.

Against these erroneous conceipts, that are indeede the ground of all the points of difference, betweene them and vs, touching originall sinne, freewill, the power of nature, the workes of infidels, and the like, we oppose this pro∣position: That no state of pure or meere nature can be conceiued, but that either a man must be lifted aboue himselfe by grace, or fall below himselfe by sin. And this proposition is proued by vnanswerable reasons: For if the principall powers of the soule, cannot performe their owne proper actions, by any natu∣rall facultie, nor without the addition of grace, and a kinde of divine force, and helpe, then can there be no conceipt of a state of pure or meere nature, see∣ing the nature of a thing implieth the powers pertaining to it, and a possibility to bring forth the actions of such powers: But it is evident that the principall powers of mans soule, cannot by any naturall facultie performe their proper actions, because the first trueth and chiefest good, are the obiects of the rea∣son, and the will, and these are infinite, and the naturall capacitie of reason and the will is finite, so that whatsoeuer we vnderstand and conceiue concerning God, is so much lesse, and commeth so much short of his infinite perfection, as the capacitie of our vnderstanding is lesse then the infinite being of God.

But how then will some man say, can man attaine his good beeing so high, excellent, & farre remoued from him, and so infinitely beyond, & without the cōpasse of his naturall facultie. The answer hereunto is, that though nothing can be lifted vp, to be any thing aboue the nature of it, yet by forrain helpe a thing may bee carried or lifted aboue it selfe, or aboue the nature of it, that is, aboue that to which the naturall facultie of it extendeth it selfe, as a stone may by the hand of man be cast vp on high, whether it hath no facultie to moue it selfe: so the soule may be raysed and lifted by grace in the acts of her powers, aboue that to which by any naturall facultie, they can extend themselues: For though by nature men cannot know God as he is in himselfe, but onely so farre forth as by his effects and glorious workes he may be knowne, yet God may present himselfe vnto them in the light of grace, as he is in himselfe, and make his in∣finite greatnesse to appeare vnto them: * 1.299 and so he must, or else man can neuer

attaine that which is is his proper good. Actus rationalis creaturae, sayth Alen∣sis. p: 3: q: 61: memb. 1. oportet quod ordinetur ad bonum quod est supra naturam, quod est summum bonum & infinitum; quia ergo non est possibilis extensio rationalis creaturae supra seipsam, ideo non est eipossibile per naturā vt ordinet suum actū siue perueniat in suum finem, & ideo necesse est quod iuuetur à gratiâ. The act of a rea∣sonable creature, must be directed to a good aboue nature which is the chiefe good, and infinite; because therefore a reasonable creature cannot raise it selfe a∣boue it selfe, therefore it is not possible that by the power of nature it should order its act, or attaine its end: and therefore it must be holpen by grace.

So then there is no immediate knowledge of God, as hee is in him selfe, no knowledge that in time for his owne sake he made all things of nothing, no knowledg how and in what sort wee depend on him, how his prouidence rea∣cheth to vs, how hee guideth us in all our wayes, and consequently how wee should loue him, feare him, and trust in him, and depend vpon him; And if with∣in the compasse of nature there bee no such knowledge of God, then is there no right loue of God; For no man can rightly loue God, vnlesse hee rightly know him; And if we doe not rightly loue God, wee can do nothing well, nay wee cannot but continually doe evill; c 1.300 For euery thing that a man willeth and affecteth, is either God, or some other thing besides God; If a man loue God & not for himselfe but for some other thing, this act is sinfull and culpable, and not morally good. If a man loue any other thing besides God, and loue it not finally for God, the act of his loue resteth finally in some other thing that is not God, and hee loueth it for it selfe without any further reference, and soe in∣ioyeth some other thing besides God, as if it were the vttermost and most principall good, which act is culpable. Now if a man remaining within the compasse of nature withour addition of grace, cannot but doe euill, then can there bee noe state of nature that is not sinnefull, without grace, and consequently there can bee no state of pure or meere nature, seeing euerie thing that is culpable and faulty in any kind, is contrary to the nature of the thing wherein it is found, and a corruption of nature. But that all the principall actions of men without grace are culpable and faulty it is euident; because they loue God for some other thing and not for himselfe, neuer coming to any knowledge of him as hee is in himselfe, and they loue other things for themselues, and finally, without any reference to God. So that grace is necessa∣rily required in man, for the performance of his actions, so as not to sinne. And it is true that d 1.301 Gregorius Ariminensis hath, that Adam in the state of his creati∣on, was not sufficiently inabled, to performe any act morally good, or soe to doe any good thing as not to sinne in doing it, by any thing in nature, if hee had not had speciall grace added. Whence it will follow that there is no power to doe good, or not to sinne, in the nature of a man, but from grace; that when grace is lost, there is an impossibility of doing good, and a necessity of doing euill.

The Papists and wee agree that originall sinne is the privation of original righteousnesse; but they suppose there was in nature without that addition of grace, a power to doe good, and that it was not giuen simply to make man able to do good, but constantly, and so as to merit heauen; so that it being taken away, a man may decline each particular sinne, and doe the seuerall workes of vertue, though neither so as neuer to sinne, nor soe as to merit heauen thereby; But wee say there neither was nor could be any power in nature as of it selfe, to doe any act morally good, or not sinnefull; that grace was giuen to inable men, to performe the actions of their principall powers, about their principall obiects, and to do good; and that it being taken away, there is found in them an impotencie to doe any act of vertue, and a necessity of sinning in all their morall actions, till they be restored again to the state of grace; that the difficulty to do good, pronenesse to euill, contrariety betweene the powers and faculties of the

soule, and the rebellion of the meaner against the superiour and better, are not the conditions of nature, as it was or might haue beene in it selfe before the entrance of sinne, but that all these proceede from the putting of the powers of the soule, by the losse of grace, out of that course, which by the law of GOD and nature they were to hold. For doth not the condition of mans nature require, that amongst things inquired after, thought of, and knowne, God should be the first? and amongst things desired and loued, nothing should be desired and loued more or before him, nor otherwise then for him? and is it not cleare and euident, that if God be the first thing that is thought of, sought after, and loued, and that nothing be sought after or respected, but after and for GOD, that there will bee noe pronenesse to euill, difficultire to doe good, contrariety betweene the powers of the soule, and rebellion of the meaner and inferiour against the better and superiour? surely there is none that can or will make question of it. Now it is confessed by the best learned amongst the Schoolemen, that howsoeuer it be not soe in the course of our vnderstanding, in this state wherein wee are, yet according to the course of the nature of our vnderstanding simply considered, it should bee soe, that * 1.302 GOD should bee the first thing sought after and knowne by vs.

Secundum naturam (sayth e 1.303 Scotus) Deus est primum cognitum, quia natu∣ralis cognitio procedit ab indeterminato ad determinatū, indeterminatū negatiuè est magis indeterminatum, quam priuatiue indeterminatum: ergo praeconcipitur illi; & illud indeterminatum priuatiue secundum nostram cognitionem praeconcipitur determinato, quia ens & res prima impressione imprimuntur in animâ nostrâ secun∣dum Auicennam 1. Metaphys. c. 5. ergo indeterminatum negatiue omnino primo est objectum nostro intellectui. At rationalitèr posterius creaturâ cognoscitur: quia pri∣mo concipitur hoc bonum, deinde bonum vniuersale abstractum secundâ abstractio∣ne, puta quod est indeterminatum priuatiuè, deinde bonum primâ abstractione ab∣stractum, quod scilicet est indeterminatum negatiuè. And therefore it is noted by the learned, that there is a double knowledge and apprehēsion of things; the one distinct, the other confused; in the confused knowledge of things that is first ap∣prehended by vs, that first affecteth the sense, but in distinct knowledge cog∣nitorum primum est communissimum, & quae propinquiora sibi sunt priora, & quae remotiora, posteriora; quia nihil concipitur distinctè, nisi quando concipiuntur om∣nia quae includuntur in ratione eius essentiali.

And to the same purpose it is that f 1.304 Bonauentura hath, Cum non esse priuatio sit essendi, non cadit in intellectum nisi per esse; esse autem non cadit per aliud; quia omne quod intelligitur, aut intelligitur vt non ens, aut vt ens in potentia, aut vt ens in actu; si igitur non ens non potest intelligi nisi per ens, & ens in potentiâ non nisi per ens in actu, & esse nominat ipsum purum actum entis, esse igitur est quod primo cadit inintellectum, & illud esse est, quod est purus actus: sed hoc non est esse particulare, quod est esse arctatum, quia permixtum est cum potentiâ, nec esse analogum, quia minime habet de actu, eò quòd minimè est: restat igitur quod illud esse, est esse diui∣num: mira igitur est coecitas intellectus, qui non consider at illud quod prius videt, & sine quo nihil potest cognoscere: sed sicuti oculus intentus in varias colorum diffe∣rentias, lucem per quam videt caetera, non videt, & si videt non tamen aduertit: sic oculus mentis nostrae intentus in ista entia particularia, & vniversalia, ipsum esse ex∣traomne genus, licet primo occurrat menti, & per ipsum alia, tamē non aduertit; vn∣de verissimè apparet, quod sicut oculus vespertilionis se habet ad lucem: ita se habet oculus mentis nostrae ad manifestissima naturae. Quia assuefactus ad tenebras en∣tium, & phantasmata sensibilium, cum ipsam lucem summi * 1.305 entis intuetur, videtur sibi nihil videre: non intelligens, quod ipsa caligo summa est mentis nostrae illumina∣tio, sicut quando videt oculus puram lucem, videtur sibi nihil videre.

By this which hath bin sayd, it is euident, that according to the course of na∣ture not disordered, nor put out of course, the first thing that is inquired after, thought of and knowne, is GOD, and that hee is the first good

that is desired & loued, & that no other thing is desired or loued but after him, & for him. So that none of the things formerly mentioned can bee found in the nature of man, vnlesse it be put out of course. Whence groweth the contrarie∣tie betweene the meaner and better, superiour and inferiour faculties of the soule, but from hence, that the soule in this state of her aversion from God, ta∣keth the beginning of all her knowledge from the senses, apprehendeth parti∣cular things as good vpon the first view, & to be desired, which afterwards v∣pon better consideration, in respects not considered at the first, shee findeth are not good nor desirable? And whence is the rebellion of the inferiour against the superiour, but from hence, that the superiour hauing cast off the dependance it formerly had vpon God & respect vnto him, the inferiour also casteth off the respect it had to it? g 1.306 Quid iustius esse poterat, quam talionem recipere? Vita Deus animae est, ipsa corporis; peccando voluntariè volens perdidit vivere, nolens perdat & vivificare; sponte repulit vitam-cùm vivere noluit, non valeat eam dare cui, vel quatenus voluerit; noluit anima regi à Deo, non queat regere corpus: si non non pa∣ret superiori, inferiori cur imperet? Invenit conditor suam sibi rebellem creaturam, inveniat animasuam sibirebellem pedissequam; transgressor inventus est homo di∣vinae legis, inveniat ipse aliam legem in membris suis repugnantem legi mentis suae, & captivantem se in legem peccati: porrò peccatum separat inter nos & Deum, separet proinde mors inter corpus nostrum & nos.

From hence likewise is that danger of erring, whereunto man is subject; for apprehending particular things first, his knowledge is imperfect, and confu∣sed; & not without much labour, and danger of erring, doth he come to the di∣stinct knowledge of any thing, And hence also floweth that ignorance that is found in men; for taking the beginning of all the knowledge they haue from the senses, they know no more touching any thing then may bee discerned by the accidents and outward effects of it, and so neuer come to know any thing in the essence of it, or immediatly as it is in it selfe. So that according to that which before I noted, out of the booke called Destructorium vitiorum; as a man may know in the darke, the length, breadth, and other dimensions of a thing, but not whether it be faire or foule, white or blacke. So men in this obscuri∣ty of discerning, may finde out that there is a God, and that he is the beginning and cause of all things: but they cannot know how faire, how good, how mercifull, and how glorious hee is, that so they may loue him, feare him, honour him, and trust in him as God, vnlesse they haue an illumination of grace,

The difference therefore betweene those of the Church of Rome and vs, touching originall sinne, consisteth in two points. First, In that they make the former defects of ignorance, difficultie to doe good, pronenesse to euill, contrarietie betweene the powers of the soule, and the rebellion of the mea∣ner and inferiour, against the better and superiour, consequents of nature, as it might and would be in it selfe simply considered, without all defection and falling from God: that originall righteousnesse was giuen, to prevent and stay the effects that these naturally would haue brought forth, and that these are not the consequents of Adams sinne, but that onely the leauing of them free to themselues to disorder all, is a consequent of the losse of that righteousnesse which was giuen to Adam, and by him forfaited and lost: that they proceede from the guilt of sinne, but that they make not them guilty in whom they are. But we say that these are no conditions of nature simply considered, that they cannot bee found but where there is a falling from God, that they are the consequents of Adams sinfull aversion from God his Creator, that they are a part of original sinne, and that they make men guilty of grieuous punishment, so long as they remaine in them.

The second thing is, that originall sin is indeed according to their opinion the privation of originall righteousnes: but as original righteousnes was not giuen

simply to inable men to decline euill and do good, but collectiuely, constantly, and meritoriously to decline euill & doe good: so the privation of it doth not depriue men of all power of declining euill & doing good, but only of the pow∣er of declining all euill, and doing all good collectiuely & meritoriously. But we say that originall righteousnes was given, simply to inable men to decline euill & to doe good, and that without it the nature of man could not performe her proper and principall actions, about her principall obiects: So that the pri∣vation of it, depriveth a man of all power of knowing, loving, fearing, honou∣ring, or glorifying God as God, and of all power, of doing any thing morally good or not sinfull; and putteth him into an estate, wherein hee cannot but loue and desire things that God would not, or so as hee would not haue him; yea of louing other things more than God: and and so as to dishonour God in any kind, rather than not to enjoy the things he desires.

So that if wee speake of originall sinne formally, it is the privation of those excellent gifts of diuine grace, inabling vs to know, loue, feare, serue, ho∣nour, and trust in God, and to doe the things he delighteth in, which Adam had & lost. If materially, it is that habituall inclination that is found in men a∣verse from God, carrying them to the loue and desire of finite things more then of God, and this also is properly sin, making guilty of condemnation, the nature and person in which it is found. This habituall inclination to desire fi∣nite things inordinately, is named concupiscence; and this concupiscence is two fold as * 1.307 Alensis noteth out of Hugo, for there is concupiscentia spiritus, and concupiscentia carnis, there is a concupiscence of the spirit, or superiour facul∣ties; & of the flesh or inferiour; the former is sinne, the latter sinne and punish∣ment. For what is more iust then that the will refusing to bee ordered by God, and desiring what hee would not haue it, should finde the inferiour faculties re∣bellious and inclined to desire things the will would haue to bee declined?

It remaineth therefore that wee proceede to proue, that this doctrine was receiued, taught, & continued in the Churches wherein our Fathers liued & died, till & after Luthers time. I haue shewed already that Gregorius Ariminen∣sis professeth, that Adam in the state of his creation, was not inabled to perform any acte morally good, or so to doe any good thing, as not to sin in doing it, by any thing in nature, without addition of grace; which thing he proveth out of the master of the sentences, whose words are these, speaking of the first man before his fall. g 1.308 Egebat itaque homo gratiâ, non vt liberaret voluntatem suam quae peccati serva non fuerat, sed vt praepararet ad volendum efficaciter bonum, quod per se non poterat. That is,

The first man needed grace, not to free his will, for it neuer had been in bondage, but to prepare and fit it effectually to will that which is good, which of it selfe it could not doe.

And he confirmeth the same out of Saint August: his words are these, h 1.309 I∣stam gratiam non habuit homo primus, quâ nunquam vellet esse malus; sed habuit in qua si permanere vellet, nunquam malus esset; & sine quâ etiam cum libero ar∣bitrio bonus esse non posset; sed eam tamen per liberum arbitrium deserere posset; nec ipsum ergo Deus esse voluit sine suâ gratiâ, quem reliquit in eius libero arbitrio, quoniam liberum arbitrium ad malum sufficit, ad bonum au•…•…m * 1.310 parumest, nisi adiuuetur ab omnipotenti bono: quod adiutorium si homo ille per liberum non deser∣uisset arbitrium, semper esset bonus, sed deseruit, et desertus est. that is, The first man

had not that grace, that might make him so will good, as neuer to become euill; but truely hee had that, wherein if hee would haue continued, hee should ne∣uer haue bin euill, and without which, notwithstanding all the freedome of his will, he could not be good; yet by the freedome of his will he might loose it; wherefore God would not haue him to be without his grace, whom he left in the freedome of his will, because free will is sufficient of it selfe to doe evill,

but it is of litle force, (or rather as the true reading is of no force, & nothing) to do good, vnlesse it be holpē of the omnipotent good, which helpe if mā had not, forsakē

by his free will, he had ever beene good; but he forsooke it, and was forsaken.

Thirdly he proueth the same in this sort: Si Adam ante peccatum potuisset per suas vires naturales praecise agere actum moraliter bonum, ipse potuisset facere se de non bono bonum, posito quod aliquando fuisset sine omni actu voluntatis, cum suis tā∣tum naturalibus; aut de bono meliorem, deo illum non specialiter adiuvante. that is,

If Adam had power before the entrance of sin precisely by the strength of his naturall faculties to do an act morally good, then hee might haue made him selfe good of not good, supposing that sometimes in the state of meere nature he had no act of will; or at the least he might haue made himselfe of good bet∣ter, without the speciall helpe of God; but this consequent must not be admit∣ted; for if Adam might thus haue done, the good Angels might haue done soe, but that is contrary to S^t Augustine, his words are these: Si boni Angeli fuerunt

prius sine bonâ voluntate, eam{que} in seipsis deo non operante fecerunt: ergo meliores à * 1.311 seipsis, quam ab illo facti sunt; Absit. At si non potuerunt seipsos facere meliores, quā eos ille fecerat, quo nemo melius quic quam facit: profecto & bonam voluntatem quà meliores essent, nisi operante adiutorio creatoris, habere non possent. that is, If the

good Angells were first without any good motion of will, or the goodnesse of the will, and afterwards, God not working, wrought it in themselues, then they made themselues better then they were made of him, which God forbid wee should euer thinke. But if they could not make themselues better then he made

them, then whom no man can do any thing better, truly vnles the helpe of their

Creator wrought them to it, they could not haue that goodnesse of wil where∣by they might become better then they were before.

That which hee thus proueth touching the state of man before the fall, is vn∣doubtedly true in the state of the fall; and therefore all the most pious and iudi∣cious men in euery age, haue taught as wee now do, that since the fall of A∣dam, there is no power left in any of his posterity before they be renewed by grace, to decline sinne or to doe any worke morally good, and that may be tru∣ly named a worke of vertue. And these cannot but farther agree with Arimi∣nensis and vs touching the impotencie of nature before the entrance of sin, to do any good act, or act of vertue, of it selfe, without the addition of grace. For if grace had not bin giuen in the state of the creation simply to inable to do good, but that there had bin a power of doing good in nature, without and before the addition of grace, then vpon the losse of it there had followed no such im∣potencie in the present state, as these men affirme there did, and they that hold the other opinion denie. All these affirme that all the posterity of Adam are plunged into such an estate of ignorance by this fall, that without speciall illu∣mination of grace, they know not sufficiently concerning any thing that is to bee done or committed, that it is to be done or committed, and where∣fore, & in what sort: & into such an estate of infirmity & impotencie in respect of the will, that they cannot will any thing that is to be willed, for such cause, and in such sort as it is to be willed, and withsuch circumstances as are requi∣red, to make an act to be morally good, and truly vertuous.

k 1.312 S^t Austine sayth, that Adam and Eue, so soone as they had sinned, were cast

headlong into error, misery, and death, & that it was most iust they should soe be; for what sayth hee is more iust then vt amittat quisque quo bene vti noluit,

cum sine vlla posset difficultate si vellet; id est, vt qui sciens rectè non facit, a•…•…ittat scire quid rectū sit; & qui rectè facere, cum posset, noluit, amittat posse cū velit? that euery one should loose that which when with ease he might hee would not vse well; that is, that he that hauing knowledge doth not right, should loose the knowledge of that which is right: & that he that would not do well when he might, should loose the power of doing well when hee would. l 1.313 And else∣where speaking of the first sinne of the Angells and men; hee sayth, that, when they fell, Subintrauit ignorantia rerum agendarum, & concupiscentia noxi∣arum; that is, there entred in ignorance of things to bee done, and desire of

things hurtfull that are to be declined. Prosper in his m 1.314 booke in defence of the preachers of grace against Cassian, reprehendeth him because he had said in his collation de protectione Dei, that Adam gained the knowledge of euill after his fall, but lost not the knowledge of good which he had receiued, & telleth him that both these propositions are vntrue; so that hee thinketh that Adam lost the knowledge of good.

n 1.315 Hugo de sancto Victore saith, the first man was indued with a threefold knowledge, cognitione scilicet creatoris sui, ut cognosceret à quo factus erat; & cognitione sui, ut cognosceret quid factus erat, & quid sibi faciendum erat; deindè cognitione quoque illius quod secum factum erat, & quid sibi de illo, & in illo faci∣endum

erat. That is, he was indued with knowledge of his Creator, that he might know of whom he was made, with knowledge of himself, that he might know what he was made, and what he was to doe; lastly, with knowledge of that which was made together with him, & what he was to doe with, & in it. For no man is to doubt but that man had perfect knowledge of all those visi∣ble things, that were made for him, & with him, as much as pertained either to the instruction of his soule, or the necessity of bodily vse. This knowledge man hath not lost by the fall, neither that whereby hee was to prouide things necessarie for the flesh, and therefore God was not carefull afterwards to in∣struct him touching these things by the Scriptures, but he was to bee taught that knowledge that concerneth the soule onely, when hee was to be restored, because he had lost that only by sinning. And in the same place hee excellently

describeth the knowledge of God that Adam had, to haue bin not by hearing only from without, as now, but by inspiration within, not that whereby now beleeuers by faith seeke after God as absent, but that whereby by presence of contemplation, he was more manifestly seene of him as knowing him. And concludeth, it is hard to expresse the manner of the diuine knowledge the first man had, but that onely this is certaine, that being taught visibly by inward in∣spiration, he could no way doubt of his Creator.

In like sort the same o 1.316 Hugo sheweth most excellently, that man hath lost all rectitude of will; for whereas there was giuen to man a double desire, iusti, & commodi: of that which is just, and that which is pleasing: the one voluntary, the other necessary; that by the one he might merite, or demerite; by the o∣ther he might be punished or rewarded (for if he had no desire of that is plea∣sing, hee could neither be rewarded by hauing, nor punished by being depri∣ued.) He hath lost the one, & is punished in the other which remaineth: when either he is kept from inioying the things he orderly desireth, or left free to desire such things, as orderly are not to be desired. If man haue lost all desire of

that which is just as just, as here he saith he hath; then surely he sinneth in all his actions, and is depriued of all morall rectitude; for what morall rectitude is in him, that loueth nothing, because it is just, farther then it may be commodious, and in that respect pleasing?

The schoolmen are wont to vrge, that a man may naturally loue God aboue all; for seeing he naturally loueth that which appeareth vnto him to bee good, why should he not loue God aboue all, who is the chief good? To this Luthers answer is this, that there is a twofold loue; for there is amor amicitiae, & amor concupiscentiae, a loue whereby a man willeth the good of him that he loueth, & a loue whereby he desireth to make vse of the good of that hee loueth, and to make it serue his turne. In the first sort a man loueth his friend; by the latter his horse: now saith Luther, it is true, that euery sinfull man loueth God with the latter kind of loue, desiring to make vse of God to serue his owne turne: but it is not possible for a naturall man to loue God as a man loueth his friend, that is, to desire that God may rule, & raigne, & be glorified as God, to rejoyce when his will is done, though it be contrary to that we desire; to bee grieued when he is offended.

And this surely is confirmed by p 1.317 Bernard, for he saith, that

there are 4 degrees of loue. For 1, a man loueth nothing but himself. 2^• Helo∣ueth other things, & amōgst other things God for himself finding that he can∣not be without him. Thirdly, He loueth God, for God. Fourthly he loueth him selfe for God.

The two former are naturall, and as I thinke finfull: the two latter I am well assured in the iudgement of Saint Bernard proceede from grace, and not from nature, for hee sayth,

That is first that is naturall, and then that which is spirituall; and that scarce any of the elect of God goe beyond the first of these two latter degrees in this life. So that according to that which

before I alleadged out of Gregorius Ariminensis, euery one that willeth any thing, either willeth God, or some other thing that is not God; if God, & not for God, but for some other thing expected to bee had from him, or by him, this is vti fruendis, to make vse of that, for the hauing of some thing as more loued, that should be enjoyed as the best and most loued of all other things, and this is most perverse, as Saint Augustine telleth vs. If wee loue any thing else besides God, and not for God, it is likewise an iniquitie. So that seeing naturally it is impossible to loue for God, it is impossible to loue any thing rightly; and consequently all the actions of naturall & vnregenerate men are sinne. And that they are so indeede, it is proved by such authorities as may not be excepted against. Cyprian de bono patientiae in principio sayth, the true ver∣tue of patience cannot be in Infidells; now there is the same reason of one ver∣tue and of all, his words are these. Hanc se sectari Philosophi quoque profitentur, sed tam illis patientia est falsa, quam & falsa sapientia; vnde enim vel sapiens esse vel patiens posset, qui nec sapientiam nec patientiam Dei novit, quando ipse de ijs qui sibi sapere in mundo videntur moneat & dicat, perdam sapientiam sapientum, & prudentiam prudentum reprobabo? q 1.318 Augustine sayth,

Thou wilt say if a Gentile shall cloath the naked, is it sinne, because it is not of faith? truely in that it is not of faith, it is sinne; not because the action of cloathing the na∣ked in it selfe is sinne: but to glory in such a worke and not in the Lord, none but an impious man will deny to bee sinne. If a Gentile that liueth not by fayth, shall cloath the naked, deliver him that is in daunger, binde vp the wounds of him that is wounded, bestow his goods to honest & friendly pur∣poses: and shall not suffer himselfe to bee brought by any torments to beare false witnesse; I aske of thee, whether hee doe these good workes well or ill? for if hee doe these things ill, that are good, thou canst not deny but that hee sinneth, that doth any thing ill: if thou say hee doth these good things, and doth them well, then an euill tree bringeth forth good fruite, which he that is truth it selfe saith cannot bee. If thou shalt say that a man that is an Infidell is a good * 1.319 tree, then hee pleaseth God, for that which is good cannot but please God who is good.

But Iulian the Pelagian answereth, as the Papists doe at this day:

I ac∣knowledge, saith hee, that they are steriliter boni, that is, their good is barren and bringeth forth no fruite, who not doing the good things they do for God, receiue not from him the reward of eternall life. The answere of Saint Au∣gustine

is out of the 6 of Mathew:

If thine eye bee evill, thy whole body shall

bee full of darkenesse, &c: Know that this eye is the intention, with which e∣very one doth that hee doth; and learne by this, that hee that doth not his good workes, out of a good intention of a good faith, that is, of that faith that wor∣keth by loue, all the whole body that consisteth of such workes as members, is full of darkenes, that is, the blacknes of sinnes. Or truely because thou gran∣test that such workes of infidels as seeme to thee to bee good, bring them not to eternall saluation and the kingdome of heaven: know thou that we say that that good will, that good worke by which onely a man may bee brought to the everlasting gift and kingdome of God, can bee given to none, without that grace that is given by him, that is the only mediatour betweene God and man. All other things that seeme to bee commendable amongst men, let them seem to thee to bee true vertues, let them seeme to thee to bee good workes, and done without all sinne. For my part this I know, that the will is not good that doth them, for an vnbeleeuing will and vngodly is not good. Let these wills be according to thy iudgement good trees, it sufficeth that with God, or in Gods judgement, they are barren, and so not good. Let them be fruitfull amongst men, amongst whom also they are good, vpon thy credit & authori∣ty, thy commendation, thy planting, if thou wilt haue it so: so that I obtaine this whether thou wilt or not, that the loue of this world, whereby euery one is a friend of this world, is not of God; and that the loue that maketh a man injoy the creatures whatsoever they bee without the loue of the creator, as the chiefest and vtter most good, is not of God. Now the loue of God where∣by wee come to God, is not but from God the Father by Iesus, together with the holy Ghost. By this loue of the creator, each one vseth the creatures rightly, and without this loue of the creator, no man vseth the creatures well.

And againe, s 1.320 Noveris non officiis, sed finibus à vitiis discernendas esse virtutes. Officium est autem quod faciendum est: finis vero propter quod faciendum est. Cum itaque facit homo aliquid vbi peccare non videtur, si non propter hoc facit propter quod facere debet, peccare convincitur. Quae tu non attendens fines ab officiis sepa∣rasti, & virtutes veras officia sine finibus appellandas esse dixisti. Ex quo te tan∣ta absurditas sequitur, vt veram cogaris appellare iustitiam, etiam cuius dominam repereris avaritiam. Siquidem manus abstinere ab alieno, si officium cogites, potest videri esse iustitiae. Sed cum quaeritur, quare fiat, & respondetur, ne plus pecuniae litibus pereat: quomodo iam hoc factum verae poterit esse iusticiae, cum serviat ava∣ritiae?

And againe. t 1.321 Absit vt virtutes verae cuiquam serviant, nisi illi vel propter il∣lum cui dicimus Psal. 79. Deus virtutum converte nos. Proinde virtutes quae car∣nalibus delectationibus, vel quibuscunque commodis & emolumentis temporalibus serviunt, verae prorsus esse non possunt. Quae autem nulli rei servire volunt, nec ip∣sae verae sunt. Verae quippe virtutes Deo serviunt in hominibus, á quo donantur ho∣minibus. Quicquid autem boni fit ab homine, & non propter hoc fit, propter quod fieri debere vera sapientia praecipit, etsi officio videatur bonum, ipso non recto fine peccatum est. & ideo, u 1.322 Virtutes non relatae ad Deum, vitia potius sunt, quam vir∣tutes: Nam licet à quibusdam tunc verae & honestae putentur esse virtutes, cum ad seipsas referuntur: nec propter aliud expetuntur, etiam tunc inflatae ac superbae sunt: & ideo non virtutes virtutes, sed vitia iudicandae sunt. a 1.323 Bona opera extra fidem, si∣millima sunt celerrimo cursui extraviam.

And againe, b 1.324 Quamlibet videatur animus corpori, & ratio vitiis laudabili∣ter imperare, si tamen Deo animus & ratio ipsa non seruit, sicut sibi serviendum esse ipse Deus praecepit, nullo modo corpori vitiisque rectè imperat. Nam qualis corporis at{que} vitiorum potest esse mens domina, veri Dei nescia, nec eius imperio sub∣iugata, sed vitiosissimis daemonibus corrumpentibus prostituta? Proinde virtutes quas sibi habere videtur, per quas imperat corpori & vitiis ad quodlibet adipiscen∣dum vel tenendum, nisi ad Deum retulerit, etiam ipsae vitia sunt potius quam vir∣tutes.

c 1.325 Prosper agrees with Saint Austine: his words are these sine cultu veri Dei etiam quod virtus videtur esse, peccatum est; nec placere ullus Deo sine Deo potest. Qui verò Deo non placet, cui nisi sibi & Diabolo placet? That is, without the

worship of the true God, euen that which seemeth to be vertue is sinne; nei∣ther can any man please God without God; And whom doth hee please that pleaseth not God but himselfe and the diuell? And the same Prosper in his d 1.326 3^d booke de vitâ contemplativâ, Apostolus non dixit, omne quod non est ex fide, ni∣hil

est; sed dicendo, Omne quod non est ex fide, peccatum est: declaravit quod omnia gesta, sinon fuerint ex fide, non sint aliqua bona credenda, sed vitia, quae non invant suos operarios, sed condemnant, inflatosque praecipitant, atque à finibus aeternae salu∣tis

eliminant; That is, the Apostle did not say whatsoeuer is not of faith is nothing, but by saying it is sinne, he declareth that whatsoeuer things haue not beene done out of faith, are not to be thought good, but faults and vices, which doe not helpe the workers of them, but condemne them, and cast them head∣long downe being puffed vp, and banish them out of the confines of eternall saluation. And the same e 1.327 Prosper in another place, Omnis infidelium vita pecca∣tum

est, & nihil bonum sine summo bono, ubi enim deest agnitio aeternae, & incom∣mutabilis veritatis, falsa virtus est etiam in optimis moribus, That is, the whole

life of Infidels is sinne, and there is nothing good without the chiefe good; and wheresoeuer the knowledge of the eternall and incommutable veritie is wanting, let a mans manners be neuer so good, it is no true vertue hee seemeth to haue.

There is nothing good without faith, saith Chrysostome, and that I may vse a similitude, and make a comparison, they that flourish in good workes and know not God, seeme to me to bee like the reliques of the dead wrapped vp fairely. Basil in his f 1.328 second booke de baptismate, proposing the question whe∣ther

it be possible, or whether it be acceptable to God, that he that serueth sin, should doe the workes of righteousnesse, bringeth the explication of this question out of the Olde Testament, where GOD saith; the sinner that

offereth to me a calfe, is as he that killeth a dogge, and in the New Testament the Lord saith, he that doth sinne is the seruant of sinne, and no man can serue two masters; wherefore we are to bee exhorted to make the tree good and her fruit good, and first to purge and make cleane that which is in the inside of the cuppe and of the platter, and then all that is without will bee cleane.

g 1.329 Gregory in his morals, writing vpon those words of Iob, If my mouth haue kissed my hand, hath these words. Sancti viri sciunt se non virtute propri•…•…

sed praeveniente supernâ gratiâ ad meliora vota vel opera commutatos; & quicquid sibi mali inesse cognoscunt de mortali propagine sentiunt meritum: quicquid verò boni in se inspiciunt, immortalis gratiae cognoscunt donum, eique de accepto mu∣nere debitores fiunt, qui & praeveniendo dedit eis bonum velle quod voluerunt, & subsequendo concessit bonum posse quod volunt. Let them that are otherwise minded, tell vs, whether the morall actions of Infidels bee good or euill, if good, then they are from grace, whereof they are not partakers, if euill, then haue they the thing proued about which we contend.

Beda writing vpon the 14^th to the Romanes vpon those words, Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne, saith as Prosper, that all the whole life of Infidels is sinne, that nothing is good without the chiefe good, that where the knowledge of the eternall and incommutable veritie is not, if the manners and con∣versation of them that haue it not, bee neuer so good, they haue no true vertue.

Bernard in his booke h 1.330 de gratiâ & libero arbitrio: Liberi arbitrii conatus ad bonum & cassi sunt si non gratiâ adiuventur: & nulli si non excitentur: caeterum in malum dicit scriptura proni sunt sensus & cogitationes hominis.

That is, the en∣deavouring of freewill to doe good is in vaine, if it bee not holpen by grace,

and none at all if it be not stirred vp by grace; but the scripture saith the senses and thoughts of men are prone to euill. Neither can they say that hee speaketh

onely of meritorious good, and such as is rewardable in heauen; for hee spea∣keth generally of good; as it appeareth, in that hee opposeth it not to some other kind of good, but to euill.

i 1.331 Anselme Archbishoppe of Canterbury fully agreeth with the rest, affirming in the same words that Prosper and Beda did before, that the whole life of infi∣dels

is sinne, that there is nothing good without the chiefe good, and that where the knowledge of the eternall and incommutable veritie is wan∣ting, if the manners and conuersation of them that haue it not bee nouer soe good and commendable, they haue no true vertue. Peter Lombard the ma∣ster

of the sentences sometimes Bishoppe of Paris writing vpon the same place, hath the same words: and soe hath the ordinary glosse.

k 1.332 Grosthead the renowned Bishoppe of Lincolne in his sermon vpon the Ad∣uent, the beginning whereof is this, There shall be signes in the sunne and in the

Moone, hath these words; Bright and glittering starres of vertue seemed to shine and appeare in the morall doctrine of naturall men, and in the conver∣sation of many Gentiles, as of the Scipioes and others: but now it is truly mani∣fest and cleare, that without the faith of Christ there is no true vertue, in the doctrine or conuersation of any man.

And in his l 1.333 Enchiridion hee sayth, that this was the opinion of S^t Augustine; where treating of the foure Cardinall vertues, and proposing the question, whether Cato and the Scipioes had such vertues, hee sayth thus: Wee grant with Augustine that no man euer had or

could haue true vertue without the faith of Iesus Christ: and proueth it imme∣diately after in this sort.

Non enim potest esse amor ordinatus, vbi contemni∣tur & non amatur quod maximè amandum est, cum non ametur nisi quod scitur aut creditur: vnde patet, quod qui nescit, aut non credit dominum Iesum Christum, non amat aut contemnit quod maximè amandum est, quapropter in tali virtus non est: quod etiam probat Augustinus talibus argumentis, dicens, Absit vt in aliquo sit vera virtus nisi sit iustus &c: that is, There can bee no

orderly loue of things where that is contemned and not loued, that is to be loued most of all, whence it is cleere and euident, that seeing nothing can bee loued but that which is knowne or beleeued, hee who knoweth not or beleeueth not the Lord IESVS CHRIST, contemneth or at least loueth not, that which is most of all to bee beloued, and therefore in such a one there can bee noe true uertue, which also Augustine proueth by arguments of this sort, saying, GOD forbidde that true vertue should be conceiued to bee in any man vnlesse hee be iust &c. By these

passages of the Bishoppe of Lincolne it appeareth, sayth Ariminensis, that hee thought, as wee doe, that noe act morally good, canne bee done without the speciall grace of GOD, for if there bee noe vertue with∣out such grace, then canne there bee noe act morallie good: which is yet more fully cleared: for euery vertuous and morall good act, ei∣ther is orderly loue, or presupposeth it: soe that if there can bee noe orderly loue without GODS grace, there can bee noe act of vertue, or act morally good. With this famous Bishoppe of LINCOLNE wee may ioyne Thomas Bradwardine, the noe lesse famous and renow∣ned Archbishoppe of CANTERBVRIE, who is his Summe de cau∣sa Dei contra Pelagium at large confirmeth and proueth the same. Soe that it seemeth by Beda, Anselme, Grosthead and this BRADWAR∣DINE, that this was euer the doctrine of the Church of England, as now it is.

m 1.334 Pupperus Gocchianus that liued a litle before Luthers time, saith, The whole life of infidels is sinne, there is nothing good without the chiefe good: where

there wanteth the knowledge of the eternall trueth, if mens manners be never

so commendable they haue no true vertue; hee that offendeth in one, that is, in chari∣ty is guilty of all; hee therefore that hath not faith and charitie, every action of his is sinne. And he addeth, n 1.335 that when Augustine sayth, that they that haue not charity may doe good things, but not well, his words are not to bee vnder∣stood, as if the things which they doe without charitie were good, when they doe them without charitie, but that they would bee good, if they were done in charity, or that they are of such nature and kind, which being done in chari∣ty, may bee good: otherwise hee should bee contrary to himselfe, where hee sayth that every action of him that hath not charity is sinne.

o 1.336 Andradius saith, that there was much difference touching this poynt not onely amongst the latter, but the more auncient divines also: and that some did so deiect all the actions and endeavours of infidels, as to affirme that none of them are or can bee without sinne; It is true indeede that there were ever some in the latter ages of the Church that contradicted this verity, which wee haue hitherto proved, but they were such as had a touch of Semipelagianisme.

p 1.337 Prosper speaketh of a rule found in the collations of Cassian, Cauendum nobis est, ne ita ad Deum omnia sanctorum referamus, vt nihil nisi id quod ma∣lum est, humanae ascribamus naturae. That is,

Wee must take heed least wee so attribute all the merits of the Saints to God, as to ascribe nothing to nature, but that which is evill and perverse. This rule sundry carefully followed in

the midst of the Church in all the latter ages, who so acknowledged that no man can merit heauen without Gods grace, that yet they thought they might doe many things morally good, by nature without grace. But Prosper bitter∣ly reprehendeth this; his wordes are these. Quasi natura ante gratiam non sit in damnatione, non sit in caecitate, non sit in vulnere: aut non gratis iustificati sint, quorum inde sunt merita vnde iustitia. That is,

As if nature before grace were not in a state of condemnation, were not in blindnesse, and greivous∣ly hurt, or as if wee were not freely justified, all whose merits are from thence, whence is our righteousnesse. And all they that rightly vnderstood

the doctrine of the Church, cleared by Saint Augustine against the Pelagi∣ans, concurred with Prosper, and taught as wee doe now, that all the workes of infidells and men not renewed and iustified by Gods speciall grace were sinnes.

Yea so great is the force of this trueth, that since the councell of Trent, some of great esteeme and place, in a sorte giue way vnto it. For Didacus Alva∣rez an Archbishop within the dominions of the king of Spaine, hath written a learned worke de Auxiliis gratiae, and dedicated it with good allowance to the king that now is; wherein hee q 1.338 sayth, that though euery morall acte that is good ex genere & obiecto, as to giue almes to a poore man out of naturall compassion, bee of that nature, that it may bee done in reference to God, as loued aboue all, as the authour of nature, or as the cause and obiect of super∣naturall happinesse, yet no such can bee so done de facto, but by the acte of charitie. So that by a man vnregenerate, no such acte canne bee done in reference to God, formally, or vertually. Now I suppose there is no mo∣rall acte that canne bee done by man, but it must bee referred, formally or vertually to some last end, and if not to God, as hee sayth the workes of Infidells cannot, then to some other end, and then of necessity they must bee sinne, for whatsoeuer is done in reference to any thing besides God as the last end, is done perversely and sinfully, The good man, no doubt, saw the trueth touching this poynt; and therefore sayth, that there is no true vertue without charity, that the workes of Infidels are not onely not meritorious, but not truely good, nor the workes of vertue: and proveth the same at large out of Augustine; whence it will follow that they are sinne; for every morall acte is either a worke of vertue and truely good, though

in an inferiour sort, or sinne; but this he durst not say, * 1.339 and so putteth him∣selfe into a necessitie of contradicting himselfe: for if an infidell when hee giueth an almes, cannot doe this act in reference to GOD, as the last end, either formally, or vertually, then hee must doe it formally, or vertually, in reference to some other thing most loued by him; and if hee doe so, then he putteth an ill circumstance to this his action, and so it cannot but bee sinne.

Thus then wee haue strongly proued, out of the testimonies of such as best vnderstood the doctrine of the Church, that grace was giuen to Adam in the day of his creation, not onely to make him constantly and collectiuely to doe all the morall duties that were required of him, and to merit supernaturall happi∣nesse, as if he might haue done the seuerall duties, and performed the seuerall acts of morall vertue without it; but simply to inable him to doe good, and decline euill, so that it being taken away, man knoweth not his true good, nor is any way inclined to seeke it as he should doe. For whereas there was a threefold eye in Adam, as r 1.340 Hugo de Sancto Victore noteth; Carnis, quo mundum & quae in mundo cernebat: rationis, quo se, & quae in se: contemplatio∣nis, quo deum: primum perfectè habet, secundum ex parte, tertium omninò non habet, nam postquam tenebrae peccati intraverunt; oculus contemplationis extinctus est ut nihil videret; oculus rationis lippus factus est, ut dubiè videret: solus oculus carnis in suâ claritate permansit.

That is, Of the flesh by which hee saw the world, and the things that are in it: of reason whereby hee saw and vnder∣stood himselfe, and all the things that were in himselfe: and of contemplati∣on,

by which he was to see God: the first he hath still in perfection, the second

in part, the third he hath wholly lost; for after the darkenesse of sinne entred, the eye of contemplation was put out, so as to see nothing at all; the eye of reason was dimmed so as to see doubtfully; only the eye of the flesh remained in perfection. And two kindes of euill are brought into the nature of man,

Privativa, amissio notitiae in intellectu, & rectitudinis in voluntate, & conversionis ad deum tanquam ad proprium obiectum: positiva, perpetuae & tristes dubitatio∣nes de Deo, de providentiá Dei, iudicio, promissionibus, comminationibus, in volun∣tate conversio ad obiecta contraria legi: That is, there are * 1.341 newly brought into

the nature of man, euils of two sorts: privatiue, as the losse of the true & right knowledge of God in the vnderstanding, of rectitude in the will, and of due conversion to God as her proper object: positiue, as perpetuall doubtings of God, of the providence of God, his judgement, promises, threates, in his will a conversion to the desiring of things the Law forbiddeth.

This corruption of mans nature is excellently described by s 1.342 Prosper, Huma∣na natura in primi hominis praevaricatione vitiata, etiam inter beneficia, inter prae∣cepta & auxilia Dei, semper in deteriorem est proclivior voluntatem, cui committi, non est aliud quam dimitti. Haec voluntas vaga, incerta, instabilis, imperita, infir∣ma ad efficiendum, facilis ad audendum, in cupiditatibus caeca, in honoribus tu∣mida, curis anxia, suspicionibus inquieta, gloriae quam virtutum avidior, fame quam conscientiae diligentior, & per omnem sui experientiam, miserior fruendo his quae concupiverit, quam carendo: nihil in suis habet viribus nisi periculi facilitatem. And againe, t 1.343 Omnes homines in primo homine sine vitio conditi sumus, & omnes naturae nostrae incolumitatem, eiusdem hominis praevaricatione perdidimus, inde tra∣cta mortalitas, inde multiplex corporis, animique corruptio, inde ignorantia, & dif∣ficultas, curae inutiles, illicitae cupiditates, sacrilegi errores, timor vanus, amor noxius, iniusta gaudia, poenitenda consilia, & non minor miseriarum multitudo, quam criminum.

By this which hath beene sayd it appeareth, that the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died, euer taught as wee doe, touching the state of mans crea∣tion, fall, and originall corruption: and euer reiected the fancies of those more then Semipelagians, that brought in the errours the Romanists now main∣taine, and so was in this as in the former points, a true, orthodoxe, and Protestant Church.

CHAP. 6.

Of the blessed Virgins conception.

HAuing spoken of Originall sinne and shewed the nature of it; the next thing that is questioned, is the generality of it; for wee say that a∣mongst al them that haue beene borne of women, there neuer was a∣ny found that was not conceiued in sinne, besides Christ the Lord, who had God for his father, and a virgin for his mother; of whose spotlesse conception, his Fathers diuinity, and mothers virginity, were proofe suffici∣ent. But they of the Church of Rome at this day, for the most part say, that the blessed virgin the mother of our Lord, was conceiued likewise without spotte of originall sinne.

Leo the tenth was moued to determine this question touching the concepti∣on of the virgin in the councell of Lateran; But Cardinall a 1.344 Caietan writeth a learned discourse touching the same matter, and offereth it to Leo praying him to be well aduised: and in this tract, for proofe of her conception in sin, he pro∣duceth the testimonies of 15 canonized Saints; For first S. Augustine writing vppon the 34 Psalme, sayth, that Adam died for sin, that Mary who came out

of the loynes of Adam died for sinne, but that the flesh of the Lord which hee tooke of the virgin Mary, died for to take away sin. And in his 2^d booke de bap∣tismo

parvulorum, Hee only who ceasing not to be God, became man, neuer had

sinne, neither did he take the flesh of sin, or sinfull flesh, though hee tooke of the flesh of his mother that was sinfull. And in his tenth booke de Genesi ad lit∣teram,

he sayth, Though the body of Christ were taken of the flesh of a woman,

that was conceiued out of the propagation of sinnefull flesh: yet because hee was not soe conceiued of her, as shee was conceiued, therefore it was not sinnefull flesh, but the similitude of sinnefull flesh. And Saint Ambrose vp∣pon

those words, Blessed are the vndefiled, hath these words: The Lord Ie∣sus

came; and that flesh that was subiect to sinne in his mother, performed the warrefare of vertue. And Crhysostome vpon Mathew sayth: Though Christ was no sinner, yet hee tooke the nature of man, of a woman that was a sinner.

And Eusebius Emissenus in his second sermon vpon the natiuity, which beginneth, Yee know beloued &c. hath these words, There is none

free from the tie and bond of originall sinne, no not the mother of the redee∣mer. Saint Remigius, vppon those words of the Psalme, O God my God, looke vpon mee: sayth; The blessed virgin Mary was made cleane from all staine of sinne, that the man Christ Iesus might bee conceiued of her with∣out sinne. Saint Maximus in his sermon of the assumption of the blessed

virgin, sayth; The blessed and glorious virgin was sanctified in her mothers

wombe from all contagion of originall sinne, before shee came to the birth, and was made pure and vndefiled by the holy Ghost. Saint Beda in his sermon

vppon missus est (and the same is in the ordinary glosse) sayth, that The holy

spirit comming vpon the virgin, freed her minde from all defiling of sinnefull vice, and made it chast, and purified her from the heate of carnall concupis∣cence, tempering and cleansing her hart. Saint Bernard in his epistle to them

of Lyons sayth: It is beleeued that the blessed virgin after her conception, recei∣ued

sanctification while shee was yet in the wombe; which excluding sinne, made her birth holy, but not her conception. Saint Erardus a Bishoppe, and

a martyr, in his sermon vpon the natiuity of the virgin, crieth out: O happie

damsell, which being conceiued in sinne, is purged from all sinne, and conceiueth a sonne without sinne. Saint Anthony of Padua in his

sermon of the natiuity of the blessed virgin sayth: The blessed virgin was san∣ctified

from sinne by grace in her mothers wombe, and borne without sinne.

Saint Thomas Aquinas (for he also was a canonized Saint) in the third part of his summe quaest. 27. art. 2. sayth, that the blessed virgin because shee was con∣ceaued

out of the commixtion of her parents, contracted originall sinne.

Saint Bonauenture vppon the third of the sentences, distinct. 3. p. 1. artic. 1. quaest. 1. sayth, Wee must say the blessed virgin was conceiued in originall

sinne, and that her sanctification followed her contracting of originall sinne: this opinion is the more common, the more reasonable, and more secure. More common, for almost all hold it. The more reasonable because the being of nature precedeth the being of grace. The more secure because it bet∣ter agreeth with the piety of faith, and the authority of the Saints, then the other. Saint Bernardine, in sermonum suorum opere tertio, in his tract of the

blessed virgin, sermon the fourth, sayth. There was a third sanctification, which

was that of the mother of God, and this taketh away originall sinne, confer∣reth grace, and remoueth the pronenesse to sinne mortally, or venially. Saint

Vincentius the Confessor, in sermone de conceptione virginis, sayth, The blessed

virgin was conceaued in originall sinne: but that the same day and houre, she was purged by sanctification from sinne contracted, so soone as euer shee had receiued the spirit of life. And besides all these holden to bee Saints in the

Church of Rome, hee sayth, there were a great multitude of auncient doctors, who speaking particularly and distinctly of the virgin, say shee was concei∣ued in originall sinne: whose sayings who pleaseth may find in the originalls: or may find them in the bookes of Iohannes de Turrecremata, and Vincentius de Ca∣stro Nouo writing vpon the conception of the virgin, whence they are taken. Thus farre Caietan.

b 1.345 Bonauentura professeth, that the opinion of the blessed virgins spotlesse conception was so new in his time, that he had neuer read it in any author, nei∣ther did he finde it to be holden by any one, that he had euer seene, or heard speak. And c 1.346 Adam Angelicus sayth: If the sayings of the Saints be to be beleeued,

wee must hold that the blessed virgin was conceiued in originall sin: and none of the Saints is found to haue sayd the contrary. Yet in time some beganne

to bring in this opinion, and to make it publike; as Scotus, and Franciscus de Maironis: but very doubtfully, and fearefully: for d 1.347 Scotus hauing spoken of both opinions touching the conception of the virgin, sayth in the conclusion: that God onely knoweth, which of them is the truer: but if it be not contrary to the authority of the Church or of holy Scripture, it see∣meth e 1.348 probable to attribute that to the virgin, that is more excellent. And that indeede hee had reason to feare least hee should contrary the Fathers and holy men that went before, it will easily appeare by that of the ma∣ster of Sentences: It may truely bee said, and wee must beleeue according

to the consenting testimonies of the Saints, that the flesh which CHRIST

tooke was formerly subiect to sinne, as the rest of the flesh of the virgin,

but that it was soe sanctified, and made pure, and undefiled, by the opera∣tion of the holy Ghost, that free from all contagion of sinne, it was vnited to

the word.

But see how strangely things were carried: this opinion which was vn∣knowne to the Church for more then a thousand yeares, and at the first broaching of it had fewe patrons, yet in time grewe to be so generally ap∣proued,

that almost all they of the Latine Church, thought they did God good seruice in following this opinion•…•… many visions, reuelations, and miracles were pretended in fauour of it, and the Councell of Basil decreed for it. Bridget ca∣nonized for a Saint, professed it had beene particularly revealed to her: but Catharina Senensis, a Prophetesse also, and more authentically canonized then the former, professed that the contrary was revealed to her, as the f 1.349 Arch-bi∣shop of Florence reporteth in his summe. And g 1.350 Caietan saith; if miracles be

pretended for proofe, great caution is to bee vsed, both in respect of the strange workes: and in respect of the illusions that may fall out in things of this kinde. In respect of the strange workes that are done, because the Angell of Satan transformeth himselfe into an Angell of light; and can doe many great and strange things, which wee would thinke to bee true mi∣racles, and such things as God onely can doe: as the workes of healing, strange mutations in the Elements, and the like. Whence it is, that it is said, Antichrist shall doe so many miracles in the sight of men, that if it were possible the very elect should bee deceiued. Moreouer as the Apostle testifieth 1 Cor. 14, and blessed Gregory in his tenth Homilie, miracles were giuen to Infidels, not to beleeuers; but to the Church, as faithfull, and not faithlesse, the propheticall and Apostolicall revelation was giuen for her direction. So that though that course of proofe that is by miracles, was ap∣pointed by Christ, Marke the last, in respect of Infidels: and though it bee * 1.351 allowed by the Church, to make good the personall condition of some man, as when one pretendeth to bee sent extraordinarily of God: yet vnlesse most clearely a true and vndoubted, not wonder, but miracle, were done in the sight of the Gouernours of the Romane Church, expressely to testifie that this particular is true, the Roman Bishops ought not to determine any doubtfull thing in matter of faith, vpon the doing of a miracle. And the reason is, because God hath appointed an ordinary course for the resoluing of points of faith, so that if an Angell from Heauen should say vnto vs any thing contrary to this way, wee were not to beleeue him, as the Apostle saith in the first to the Galathians. Adde hereunto, that the miracles which the Church admitteth in the canonization of Saints, which yet are most authenticall, are not altogether certaine, seeing the credite of them dependeth vpon the te∣stimonie of men, and euery man is a lyar. And hee concludeth, that i 1.352 these things being so, wise men thinke, that pretended miracles and re∣velations in this kinde, contrary to so many Saints, and auncient Do∣ctours, argue rather that the Angell of Satan is transformed into an Angell of light, and that whatsoeuer things are alleadged in this kinde are meere fancies, and counterfeite stuffe, then that they prooue the trueth of this conceipt; and that proofes in this kinde are fitter for silly women, then coun∣cels to take notice of.

It appeareth by Saint k 1.353 Bernard, that in his time they of Lyons in France, out of a superstitious conceipt, as he rightly censureth it, beganne to celebrate the Feast of the Conception of the blessed Virgin, supposing that she was con∣ceiued without sinne; but he opposeth himselfe against this innovation, and

saith, the observation of the Church hath no such thing, reason inferreth it not, nor ancient tradition commendeth it, that wee are not more learned & devout then our Fathers, that in like sort others may bring in the Feast of her parents Conception, that patriae non exilii frequentia haec gaudiorum, & nu∣merositas festivitatum cives non exules decet: That, whereas some brought out a certaine pretended writing of divine revelation, it was not to be regar∣ded, and that another might bring forth the like writing, wherein the holy Virgin might bee found to commaund the same thing to be done, in honour of her parents, according to the commaund of the Lord, Honour thy father and thy mother, so did hee shew his dislike.

Yet after this many Churches receiued the same obseruation; and in processe of time all were brought to keepe the same day holy: yet so that many of them professed, that they would keepe it holy, not in respect of her preseruation, but of her sanctification from sinne. So that wee see, that this poynt of Ro∣mish superstition, was neuer admitted by the Church, but protested against by all the most worthy members of it; which thing besides that which hath al∣ready beene alleadged, the reader may finde farther confirmed by Ariminen∣sis; who not only contradicteth this fancie himself, but produceth many autho∣rities for the reproof of it. So that herein also the Church wherein our Fathers liued, and died, is found to haue beene a Protestant Church, as in the former.

But some man will say, many of those that we produce for witnesses that she was conceiued in sinne, yet thinke that shee was sanctified in the wombe, and borne without sinne. For answere herevnto, we must obserue that which Gre∣gorius Ariminensis hath, that many thought shee was sanctified in the wombe, * 1.354 and borne without originall sinne, as sinne, and making guilty of condemnati∣on: but not without concupiscence inclining to euill, which was wholly taken away, or so restrained by the superabundance of grace, when the holy spirit overshadowed her, that shee might be the mother of God; that it should neuer be an occasion of sinne: this opinion the m 1.355 master of sentences followeth: and this opinion the Schoolemen followe for the most part.

But n 1.356 August: sayth, Ista sanctificatio quâ efficimur & singuli templa Dei, & in vnum omnes templum Dei, non est nisi renatorum, quod nisi nati homines esse, non possunt. Si homo regenerari per gratiam spiritus in vtero potest, quoniam restat illi adhuc nasci, renascitur ergo antequam nascitur, quod fieri nullo modo potest. Seeing therefore none can be sanctified before hee bee borne, neither canne any man be cleansed from originall sinne before his birth; in asmuch as that is not taken away, but by the infusion of grace. And the glosse vpon the eigth to the Romans saith,

Christ was the first that was borne without sinne. And An∣selme

in his second booke cur Deus homo, hath these wordes:

Though Christs conception were pure, and without the sinne of carnall delight, yet the virgine her selfe, of whom he tooke flesh, was conceiued in iniquity, and her mother conceiued her in sinne, and shee was borne with originall sin, because shee also sinned in Adam in whom all sinned.

And diverse of the Fathers feared not to make her subject to actuall sin. * 1.357 p 1.358 Origen writing vpon Luke, insisting vpon those wordes of Simeon to Mary,

a sword shall pierce thorough thy soule, hath these wordes: What is this sword that pierced the heart, not only of others, but of Mary also? It is plain∣ly written, that in the time of his passion all the Apostles were scandalized, as the Lord himselfe had sayd, you shall all be scandalized this night: they were all therefore so scandalized, that even Peter the prince of the Apostles denyed him thrice. What shall we thinke that when the Apostles were scandalized, the mother of our Lord, was free from being scandalized? Surely if shee suffe∣red no scandall in the time of the Lords passion, Christ dyed not for her sins; but if all haue sinned, and haue bin depriued of the glory of God, & are justifi∣ed by his grace, & redeemed, then surely Mary was scandalized at that time: and that is it that Simeon now prophesieth, And even thy soule, (which know∣est that being a virgine, and neuer knowing man, thou broughtest him forth, which heardest of the Angell Gabriel, the holy Ghost shall come vpon thee, & the power of the most high shall ouershadow thee,) a sword of infidelity shall pierce; thou shalt bee stricken with a sword of doubting: and thy thoughts shall rent thee into diuerse parts, when thou shalt see him whō thou heardest to be the son of God, and whom thou knewest to be generated in thee without the seed of man, to be crucified, to die, to be subiect to humane

punishments, and at the last with teares & strong cries complayning & saying,

if it be possible let this cup passe from me.

q 1.359 Chrysostome vpon the 13 Psalme agreeth with Origen: his words are these:

When Christ was crucified, there was none found that did good: the Dis∣ciples all fledde away, Iohn ranne away naked, Peter denied him, the sword of doubting went through the soule of Mary her selfe. And r 1.360 Augustine to

the same purpose hath these words. And that which hee addeth saying, and a

sword shall pierce thy soule, that the thoughts of many harts may be reuealed: thereby doubtlesse, hee signified, that euen Mary herselfe, of whom the sonne

of God tooke flesh, should doubt in the time of Christs death, but soe, as to be confirmed in his resurrection. And s 1.361 Theophylact vppon the same place of Luke, Happily by the sword he vnderstandeth the dolor, happily the scandall

wherewith Mary was scanalized, for seeing him to bee crucified, happily shee thought how hee that was borne without the seed of man, who had done miracles and raised the dead, could be crucified, spitte vpon, and die: and that hee sayth, the cogitations of many harts shall bee reuealed, importeth no more but the thoughts of many that shall be scandalized, shall be reuealed: and being reprehended, they shall find present remedy: and so shalt thou o virgin, be re∣uealed, and manifested, what thou thoughtest of Christ: and then thou shalt be confirmed in the faith: so likewise Peter shall bee manifested, when hee shall denie him: but the power of God shall be shewed when he receaueth him vp∣pon his repentance.

t 1.362 Chrysostome writing vpon those words: behold thy mother and thy brethren &c. and those words of Christ, Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? sayth,

that Christ vttered these words, not as being ashamed of his mother, or deny∣ing her that bare him, (for had he bin ashamed of her, he would not haue passed through her wombe:) but shewing that it would nothing profit her, that she was his mother, vnles she did all those things that beseemed her: for this that she now attempted, argued too much ambition: for she would make it known to the people, that she had power ouer and could command her sonne, not con∣ceauing any greate matter of him, and therefore shee came vnseasonably. See therefore, sayth hee, the want of discretion, in her and them, for it had beene fitte for them to come in, and to haue heard with the multitude: or if not, to haue stayd till hee had ended his speech, and then to haue come vnto him: but they call him out, and this they doe before all, shewing too much ambition, and willing to shew that with greate power they command him.

And in another place, u 1.363 It is admirable to see, how the disciples, though very

desirous to learne, yet knew when it is fitte to aske him: for they doe not this in the sight and hearing of all: and this Mathew sheweth saying, and comming vnto him: and Saint Marke, they came vnto him priuately, or when hee was alone: It had beene fitte his mother and his brethren had done so, & that they should not haue called him out and made such a shew as they did. And writing

vpon Iohn, and intreating of those words of the virgin (when the wine began to faile,) they haue no wine, sayth, x 1.364 Shee was willing to do them a pleasure, and

to make herselfe the more illustrious by her child: and happily shee was carri∣ed with some humane affection, as his brethren were, when they sayd, shew thy selfe to the world, desiring to reape glory from his miracles: and therefore hee auswereth something sharpely, saying, what haue I to doe with thee? my houre is not yet come: & a little after, speaking of her calling him out mentio∣ned

in the former place, hee sayth: Shee had not that opinion of him that

was fitte, but because shee had brought him forth, shee thought to command him in euery thing, after the manner of other mothers, whom she should haue honoured and worshipped as her Lord: and therefore hee sayth, who is my mo∣ther? And y 1.365 Theophylact writing vpon the same words, sayth: the mother of

Christ would take vpon her to be a mother, and shew that shee had power o∣uer her sonne, for as yet shee conceiued noe great thing of him: and there∣fore shee would drawe him out vnto her, while hee was yet speaking, being

a little proud, that she had such a sonne at her commaund. What doth Christ therefore? because he knew her intention, heare what hee saith. Who is my mother? which he said not to wrong his mother, but to correct her minde, desirous of glory, & subject to such affections as men are wont to be. Euthy∣mius

in his Commentaries obserueth the former place in Chrysostome, but da∣reth not reprehend it, as z 1.366 Sixtus Senensis telleth vs.

But they will say a 1.367 Augustine affirmeth, that the Mother of our Lord was without sinne; surely it will be found that he saith no such thing; the circum∣stances of that they alleadge out of Augustine are these; The Pelagian com∣memorateth sundry holy ones, which are reported not onely not to haue sin∣ned, but to haue liued righteously, as Abel, Enoch, Melchizedech, Abraham, Isaak, Iacob &c. and addeth to these certaine women, as Deborah, Anna, Sa∣muels mother, Iudith, Esther, another Anna the daughter of Phanuel, Eliza∣beth, and the mother of our Lord and Sauiour, whom he saith that pietie requi∣reth vs to confesse to haue beene without sinne. The words of Augustine, in

answer to the Pelagian are these: except therefore the holy Virgin Mary, (of whom for the honour of our Lord, I will make no question at all, now that wee are to speake of sinnes; for hence doe we know that more grace was giuen to her wholly to ouer come sinne, who was honored so much as to con∣ceiue and beare him, whom wee know to haue had no sinne; this Virgin therefore excepted) if we could gather together all those holy men and wo∣men, as now liuing, and aske of them whether they were without sinne, what answer thinke we would they make? I pray tell me whether that which this man saith, or that which the Apostle Iohn? surely how much soeuer they ex∣celled in sanctity while they were in this body, they would all crye out with a loud voice, If we say, we haue no sinne, wee deceiue our selues, and there is no trueth in vs.

b 1.368 Gregorius Ariminensis noteth, that Augustine speaketh not of originall sin, but actuall, and that this ample grace to ouercome sinne, was not giuen her till the spirit ouer-shadowed her, and the power of the most High came vpon her, that shee might conceiue and beare him that neuer knew sinne, so that be∣fore shee might commit sinne, which yet hee will not affirme, because the mo∣derne Doctours for the most part thinke otherwise, so intimating that all did not. And surely the wordes of Augustin, doe not import that shee had no sinne, but that shee ouercame it, which argueth a conflict: neither doth hee say, he will acknowledge shee was without sinne, but that hee will not moue any question touching her, in this dispute of sinnes and sinners. So passing by the point, and not willing to enter into this dispute with the Pelagian, who conceiued it would be plausible for him, to pleade for the puritie of the Mo∣ther of our Lord, and disgracefull for any one to except against her. By that which hath beene said it appeareth, that the Church of God neuer resolued any thing, touching the birth of the blessed Virgin without sinne, nor whether shee were free from all actuall sinne, or not.

If happily it bee alleadged, that the Church celebrated the Feast of her na∣tivitie, and therefore beleeued that shee was borne without sinne. First, touching the celebration of this Feast, it is evident, that it was not auncient: c 1.369 That it was not in the dayes of Saint Augustine, (as some imagine, because on that day there is read in the Church a Sermon of Saint Augustines, touch∣ing the solemnitie of that day,) it is proued out of Saint Augustine him∣selfe, for in his 21 Sermon de sanctis he hath these wordes.

Wee celebrate this day the birth-day of Iohn the Baptist, which honour wee neuer read to haue beene giuen to any of the Saints. Solius enim Domini & beati Ioan∣nis

dies nativitatis

in universo mundo celebratur, & colitur: That is, For the birth-day of our Lord onely, and of Iohn the Baptist is cele∣lebrated & kept holy throughout the whole world: illum enim sterilis peperit

illum virgo concepit, in Elizabetha sterilitas vincitur, in beatâ Mariâ concepti∣onis consuetudo mutatur; That is,

A woman that was barren bare the one, and a virgin the other, in Elizabeth barrennes is ouercome, in blessed Mary the ordinary course of conceiuing is changed. And in his 20^•h sermon, hee hath

these words: Post illum sacrosanctum Domini natalis diem, nullius hominum na∣tivitatem legimus celebrari, nisi solius beati Ioannis Baptistae. In aliis sanctis & electis Dei, novimus illum diem coli, quo illos post consummationem laborum, & devictum triumphatumque mundum, in perpetuas aeternitates praesens haec vita par∣turit. In aliis consummata vltimi diei merita celebrantur, in hoc etiam prima di∣es, & ipsa etiam hominis initia consecrantur; pro hac absque dubio causà, quia per hunc Dominus adventum suum, ne subito homines insperatum non agnoscerent vo∣luit esse testatum. That is,

After that most sacred day of the birth of our Lord, wee reade not that the nativity of any one amongst men is celebrated, but of Iohn the Baptist onely; touching other Saints, and other the chosen of God, wee know that that day is celebrated, in which, after the consummation of their labours, after their victories and triumphs ouer the world, this present life bringeth them forth to begin to liue for euer. In others the consummate vertues of the last day are celebrated, in this the first day, and the beginnings of the man are consecrated; for this cause no doubt, because the Lord would haue his comming made knowen to the world by him, least if his comming had not beene expected and looked for, it might happily not haue beene ac∣knowledged. Neither doth the reading of the sermon of Saint Augustine on

that day pertayning to the solemnity of the day, proue that this day was kept holy before his time; for as d 1.370 Baronius sheweth, the sermon was fitted origi∣nally to the solemnity of the feast of the Annunciation, & the words were these,

Let our land reioyce illustrated with the solemne, day of so great a virgine,

which are altered and read in the breviarie in this sorte,

Let our land rejoyce illustrated by the birth day of so great a virgin. And it is evident by the e 1.371 coun∣cell

of Mentz holden in the time of Charles the great in the yeare 813, that this feast was not celebrated in the Church of Germany and France in those times. As likewise it appeareth by the f 1.372 constitutions of Charles and Ludo∣vicus Pius.

Secondly, the celebrating of the birth-day of the blessed virgine, will no more proue that shee was borne without all sinne, then that Iohn the Baptist was so borne; concerning whom Bernard sayth, hee knoweth he was sanctifi∣ed before he came out of the wombe, but how farre this sanctification freed him from sinne, hee dareth not say or define any thing. Thus wee see that the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died, was a Protestant Church, in these poynts touching the conception & birth of the blessed virgine, aswell as in the former.

CHAP. 7.

Of the punishment of originall sinne and of Limbus puerorum.

a 1.373 BEllarmine sheweth, that there are foure opinions in the Roman Church touching the punishment of originall sinne, and the state of infants dying vnregenerate; for Ambrosius Catharinus in his booke of the state of children dying vnbaptized, Albertus Pighius in his first controversie, and Savanarola in h•…•…s booke of the triumph of the crosse, doe teach, that infants dying without baptisme, shall after the iudgement enioy a kinde of naturall happinesse, and liue happily for euer, as it were in a certaine earthly paradise: howsoeuer for the present they goe downe into those lower parts of the earth, which are called Limbus puerorum. These men suppose, that infants incurre no staine or infection by Adams sinne; but that for his of∣fence

being denyed the benefit of supernaturall grace, which would haue made them capable of heauen happines, they are found in a state of meere nature, in which as they cannot come to heauen, so they are subiect to no euili that may cause them to sorrow. For though they see that happines in heaven, where∣of they had a possibility, yet they no more greiue that they haue not attained it, then innumerable men doe that they are not Kings and Emperours, as well as others, of which honours they were capable as well as they, in that they were men. The second opinion is, that infants dying in the state of originall sinne not remitted, are excluded from the sight of God, and condemned to the prison house of the infernall dwellings for euer, so that they suffer the punish∣ment of losse but not of sense; and that they are subiect to no dolour or greife inward or outward, this he saith is the opinion of Thomas Aquinas, and some other Schoolemen. The third opinion is, that they are in a sorte subiect to the punishment of sense, that is, to greife and dolour, which floweth out of the consideration of their great and inestimable losse of eternall happines, but because they cannot haue remorse, not hauing lost that eternall good by their owne negligence and contempt, therefore they are not subiectto that dolour that is properly named the worme that neuer dieth, whereof wee reade in the ninth of Marke.

Their worme dieth not and their fire neuer goeth out

* 1.374 There is a fourth opinion, which is that of b 1.375 Augustine, who sayth:

Wee must firmely beleeue, and no way doubt, that not onely men that haue had the vse of reason, but infants also, dying in the state of originall sinne, shall bee punished with the punishment of eternall fire; because though they had no sinne of their owne proper action, yet they haue drawne to themselues the condemnation of originall sinne, by their carnall conception. To this opini∣on

Gregorius Ariminensis inclined, fearing exceedingly to depart from the do∣ctrine of the Fathers, and yet dareth not resolue any thing, seeing the moderne doctours went another way. And to the same opinion c 1.376 Driedo inclineth like∣wise.

Thus then wee see that Pelagianisme was taught, in the midst of the Church wherein our Fathers liued, and that not by a few but many; For was not this the doctrine of many in the Church, that there are foure mansions in the other world of men sequestred from God, and excluded out of his presence. The first ofthem that sustaine the punishment as well of sensible smart, as of losse, and that for euer, which is the condition of them that are condemned to the low∣est hell. The second of those that are subiect to both these punishments, not eternally, but for a time onely, as are they that are in purgatory. The third of them that were subiect onely to the punishment of losse, and that but for a time, named by them Limbus patrum. The fourth of such as are subiect onely to the punishment of losse, but yet eternally; and this named by them Limbus pu∣erorum? nay were there not that placed these in an earthly paradise? and was not this Pelagianisme? Surely d 1.377 August: telleth vs, that the Pelagians exclu∣ded such as were not made pertakers of Gods grace, out of the kingdome of heaven, and from the life of God, which is the vision of God, and yet suppo∣sed that they should be for euer in a kind of naturall felicity; so that they imagi∣ned a third state and place, betweene the kingdome of heauen and hell, where they are that endure, not onely the punishment of losse, but of sensible smart also; where they are whose worme neuer dieth; and whose fire neuer goeth out; and this is the opinion of Papists, against which Saint e 1.378 Austine mightily opposeth himselfe.

The vnregenerate is excluded out of the kingdome of heauen, where Christ remaineth that is the fountaine of the liuing. Giue mee, besides this another place, where there may bee a perpetuall rest of life; the first place the faith of Catholiques by diuine authoritie, beleeueth to bee the kingdome of heauen: the second Hell, where euery apostata, and such as are aliens from the faith of Christ, shall suffer everlasting punishment: but that

there is any third place we are altogether ignorant, neither shall wee finde in the holy Scripture, that there is any such place. There is the right hand of him that sitteth to iudge, and the left; the kingdome, and hell; life, and death; the righteous, and the wicked: On the right hand of the Iudge are the iust, and the workers of iniquity on the left. There is life to the ioy of glory, and death to weeping and gnashing of teeth. The just are in the Kingdome of the Father with Christ; the vnrighteous in eternall fire prepared for the di∣vell and his Angels. By which words of Augustine it is euident, that there

is no such place to bee admitted, as the Papistes imagine their Limbus puerorum to bee: neither did the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died, beleeue any such thing, though many embraced this fancie,

And therefore Gregorius Ariminensis hauing proued out of Augustine, and Gregory, that infants that die in the state of originall sinne not remitted, shall not onely suffer the punishment of losse, but of sense also, concludeth in this

sort. Because I haue not seene this question expressely determined either way by the Church, and it seemeth to me a thing to be trembled at, to deny the authorities of the Saints: and on the contrary side, it is not safe to goe a∣gainst the common opinion, and the consent of our great Masters, there∣fore without peremptorie pronouncing for the one side, or the other, I leaue it free to the Reader to judge of this difference, as it seemeth good vnto him.

CHAP. 8.

Of the remission of originall sinne, and of concupiscence remaining in the regenerate.

IN the remission of all sinne there are two things implyed; the taking away of the staine or sinfulnesse, and the remouing of the punishment, that for such sinfulnesse justice would bring vpon the sinner. In actuall sinne there are three things considerable. First, an act or omission of act. Secondly, an habituall aversion from God, and conversion to the creature remaining after the act is past, till we repent of such act, or omission of act; and this is the staine of sinne remaining, denominating the doers sinners, and making them worthie of punishment. And thirdly, a designing to punishment after the act is past. In remission therefore of actuall sinne there must bee; first, a ceasing from the act or omission; secondly, a turning to God and from the creature, and third∣ly, for Christs sake, who suffered what we deserued, a taking away of the pu∣nishment that sin past made vs subject to.

In originall sinne there are onely two things considerable; the staine or sin∣fulnesse, and the designing of them that haue it to punishment. The staine of o∣riginall sinne consisteth of two parts: the one privatiue, which is the want of those divine graces that should cause the knowledge, loue, and feare of God: the other positiue, and that is an habituall inclination to loue our selues more then God, and inordinately to desire whatsoeuer may be pleasing to vs, though forbidden and disliked by God; and is named concupiscence. This sin first de∣fileth the nature, and then the person; in that it so misinclineth nature, as that it hath the person at commaund, to be swayed whether it will. The remission of this sinne implieth a donation of those graces, that maycause the knowledge, loue, and feare of God, a turning of vs from the loue of our selues, to the loue of God, and forChrists sake a remouing of the punishment we were justly subiect to, in that we had such want, and inordinate inclination. The donation of grace maketh originall sinne cease so to misincline nature, as formerly it did, and so as to haue the person at command to be swayed whether it will; it maketh it not cease to misincline nature in some sort, and so to be a sinne of nature, it maketh

it cease to be a sinne of the person, freeing it from being subiect to it, and put∣ting it into an opposition against it; so that it is no farther a sinne of the person, then it is apt to be ledde by it, to be hindred from good, or drawne to euill. The nature and person are freed from the guilt of condemnation; the nature in respect of the sinne that remaineth in it is subiect to punishment; the person is not free from those punishments which the remaining sinne of the nature it hath, bringeth vpon it, as death &c: The person is freed from being subiect to any punishment, farther then it must needes be in respect of nature. So that originall sinne or concupiscence remaineth in act in the regenerate, mouing to desire things not to be desired; and so a sinne of nature, making it subiect to pu∣nishment; but it doth not remaine in act illiciendo & abstrahendo mentem, eius{que} consensu concipiendo, & pariendo peccata; that is, it doth not so remaine in act, as to allure and draw the minde, and to gaine the consent of it to conceiue and bring forth sinne, and so remaineth not in the guilt of condemnation, nor as a sinne of the person.

If therefore when the question is proposed, whether concupiscence in the regenerate which grace restraineth and opposeth, be sinne; wee vnderstand by sinne a thing that is not good, an euill that is not a pvnishment onely, but a vice and fault; and such an euill as positiuely and priuatiuely repugneth, a∣gainst the law which the spirit of God writeth in the harts of the belee∣uers; an iniquitie; a thing that God hateth, and which wee must hate and resist against by the spirit, that it bring not forth euill acts; if wee vnderstand by sinne such a disposition of nature, as God by the law of creation at first forbad, and ceaseth not still to forbidde to be in the nature of man; it is undoubtedly sinne, a sinne I say of nature, though not of person. And hereunto a 1.379 Stapleton agreeth; for whereas it is obiected out of b 1.380 Augustine, to proue that concupiscence in the regenerate is sinne; that as blindnesse of hart is a sinne, in that men by reason of it beleeue not in God, and a punishment of sinne wherewith the proud hart of man is punished, and a cause of sinne, when men through errour of their blind hart do any euill thing; So that concupiscence of the flesh, against which the good spirit opposeth good desires, is a sinne, in that there is in it disobedi∣ence against the minde that should command; and a punishment of sinne, because it was iustly brought vppon him, whose disobedience against God deserued so; and a cause of sinne, when it obtaineth a consent: hee answereth, setting aside all other answers as not sufficient, that concupiscence in that place is sayd by Au∣gustine, not onely to be a punishment and cause of sinne, but sinne also, not as if it were truly and properly a sinne, making God displeased with the regenerate in whom it is; but that it is a sinne of nature, respecting the first integrity of it, and not of the person; according to that of the Apostle, It is not I that do it, but

the sinne that dwelleth in mee that is in my flesh. For the reason which hee bringeth why it is sinne, doth euidently shew this.

Because, sayth hee, there is in it disobedience against the dominion of the minde, it is therefore a certaine sinne, or fault, contrary to the integrity of nature, in which there was no diso∣bedience of the flesh: as it is a fault of the eye, to be dimme, and of the eare to heare imperfectly. And though Sapleton say he had no author to follow in this interpretation: yet hee might easily haue found, that Alexander of Ales long since was of the same opinion, making concupiscence in the regenerate a sinne of nature and not of the person, as I haue c 1.381 else where shewed at large.

If this be soe, what then will some man say is the difference, betweene the Romanists and those of the reformed Churches? surely it is very great, for these teach that concupiscence was newly brought into the nature of man by Adams sinne, that in the vnregenerate it is properly sinne, that it maketh them guiltie and worthy of eternall condemnation that haue it. But the Romanists say it was not newly brought in by Adams fall: that it is a consequent of na∣ture: that it is more free, and at liberty to produce the proper effects of it now,

then it would haue beene if grace had not been lost, but not more then it would haue beene in nature simply considered without grace or sinne; and that it ne∣ver made them guilty that had it. These say, that in the regenerate it is so far weakened, as that it hath no power to sway him that is so renewed, to what it pleaseth; that the guilt of condemnation which it drew vpon man before his regeneration, is taken away; that yet still it is a sinne of nature, making guilty of punishment, that yet still it is hated of God, and must be hated of vs: But the Romanists say, the guilt that is taken away, is not the guilt whereby concupiscence maketh guilty, but out of which it came, that man de∣served to haue concupiscence free and at libertie: And therefore d 1.382 Bellarmine sayth, the guilt of concupiscence may be conceiued in three sortes. First, To be a guilt rising from it, and founded in it, making him guilty that hath it, as the guilt of theft is that whereby he is guilty that hath committed theft. Secondly, That may bee sayd to bee the guilt of concupiscence, not that floweth from it, but from which it floweth; as if a man should cut off his hand, he might be said to be guilty of the hand that is cut off, not because it is a sinne making guilty to haue a hand cut off, but because he is guilty of the not hauing a hand, that hath cut it off himselfe: so wee are to vnderstand the guilt of concupiscence, not as if the hauing of it did make a man guilty, but because Adam by sinne, made himselfe guilty of hauing concupiscence at libertie to sollicit him to ill, that was formerly restrained. Thirdly the guilt of concupiscence is that which it causeth, if it obtaine consent to those motions it maketh; not for that a man is guilty because he hath concupiscence, but because he yeeldeth to it. So that according to their opinion, when there is a remission of the offence, that set concupiscence at liberty, it is no guilt to haue it, for it is naturall. Foure things therefore are to be proved by vs. First, That concupiscence was no condition of nature. Secondly, That it maketh guilty of eternall condemnation, if it bee not remitted. Thirdly, That God hateth it, and that wee must hate it, as long as any remaines of it are found in vs. Fourthly, That the first motions of it are sin.

The first of these foure is clearely deliuered by Saint Augustine in his e 1.383 third booke against Iulian, his wordes are these, An vero cuiuscunque frontis sis, aude∣as suspicari, in primâ hominum constitutione, priusquam culpam debita damnatio sequeretur, istam carnalem concupiscentiam aut extitisse in paradiso, aut inordina∣tis, vt eam nunc videmus motibus, pugnas adversus spiritum faedissimas edidisse? And in his f 1.384 fourth booke where Iulian obiecteth, that if wee graunt, that that concupiscence of the flesh, against which wee resist by continencie, was not in paradise before sinne, but that it flowed from that sinne, which the devill first perswaded the first man to commit, it will bee consequent that the senses of seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and handling, are not of God but of the de∣vill; hee answereth, that Iulian is ignorant or maketh shew to be ignorant, per quemlibet corporis sensum, aliud esse sentiendi vivacitatem, vel vtilitatem, vel necessitatem; aliud sentiendi libidinem, Vivacitas sentiendi, quâ magis alius, alius minus, in ipsis corporalibus rebus, pro earum modo atque naturâ quod verum est percipit, atque id à falso magis minusve discernit. Vtilitas sentiendi est, per quam corpori vitaeque quam gerimus, ad aliquid approbandum, vel improbandum, sumen∣dum vel reijciendum, appetendum, vitandumve consulimus; Necessitas sentiendi est, quando sensibus nostris etiam quae nolumus ingeruntur. Libido autem sentien∣di est, de quâ nunc agimus, quae nos ad sentiendum, sive consentientes mente, sive re∣pugnantes, appetitu carnalis voluptatis impellit. Haec est contraria delectationi sa∣pientiae, haec virtutibus inimica. And in his g 1.385 fifth booke he hath these wordes; Dixi inobedientiam carnis, quae in carne concupiscente aduersus spiritum apparet, diabolico vulnere contigisse. And again, Hanc legem peccati repugnantē legi mentis, á Deo illatam propter vltionem, & ideo poenam esse peccati. But I will no longer in∣sist vpon this poynt, hauing sufficiently proved in that part that is of originall sinne, that all these evils did flow from Adams transgression, & were no condi∣tions of nature,

The next thing that is to be proued is, that concupiscence till it be remitted, maketh them in whom it is, guilty of eternal condemnation: This is proued out of Saint i 1.386 Augustine, his words are these: Iulianus concupiscentiam bonam praedicat, Nos autem qui eam malam dicimus, & manere tamen in baptizatis, quamvis reatus eius (non quo ipsa erat rea, neque enim aliqua persona est, sed quo reum hominem originaliter faciebat) fuerit remissus, atque vacuatus; absit ut dicamus sanctificari, cum quâ necesse habent regenerati, si non in vacuum Dei gra∣tiam susceperunt, intestino quodam bello tanquam cum hoste confligere, atque ab eâ peste desiderare atque optare sanari. And afterwards, Et concupiscentia quae ma∣net oppugnanda atque sananda, quamvis in baptismo dimissa sint cuncta omninò pec∣cata, non solùm non sanctificatur, sed potius ne sanctificatos aeternae morti obnoxios possit tenere, evacuatur.

* 1.387 Gregorius Ariminensis fully agreeth with Augustine, and contradicteth Bellarmine: his wordes are these,

Originall sinne is in a sort taken away, and in a sort remaineth after Baptisme: for it is taken away in respect of the guilt, not of the essence; that is, that vice, or that qualitie that is named con∣cupiscence, and is before Baptisme originall sinne, abideth truely in the es∣sence of it after Baptisme, but not in the guilt; that is, it maketh not men guil∣ty of condemnation after Baptisme, as it did before; and for proofe hereof he

alleadgeth the testimony of S. Augustine in his booke de peccato originali: his words are these: Obesset ista carnalis concupiscentia etiam tantummodo quod inesset; nisi peccatorum remissio sic prodesset, ut quae in eis est, & nato, & renato, nato quidem & inesse & obesse, renato autem inesse quidem, sed non obesse possit. In tantum enim obest natis, ut nisi renascantur, nihil possit prodesse, si nati sunt de rena∣tis. Manet quippe in prole, ita ut reatum faciat, originis vitium, etiamsi in pa∣rente reatus eiusdem vitii remissione ablutus est peccatorum. That is, Carnall

concupiscence by onely being in a man would vndoe him; if remission of sinnes did not so helpe the matter, that it being in men borne, and borne a new; in men. as borne into the world, it is, and is to their hurt, and euill: in men * 1.388 borne anew, it onely is, but is not to their hurt. For it is so farre forth hurt∣full * 1.389 to men borne, that vnlesse they bee borne a newe, it nothing profiteth them to haue beene borne, of such as were new borne. For originall sinne doeth so abide in the childe, as to make him guilty, though the guilt of the same sinne be taken away in the parent, by remission of sinnes.

The Master of sentences in his m 1.390 2^d booke, agreeth with Saint Augustine: his

wordes are these: Vnlesse it be by an ineffable miracle of the Creator, Bap∣tisme doth not cause the Law of sinne which is in our members to bee extin∣guished, and not to bee: it causeth indeede all the euill a man hath thought or done, to be abolished, and to be accounted as if it had neuer beene done: but it suffereth concupiscence (the bond of guilt, where with the diuell by it, held the soule, and separated it from God her Creator, being loosened) to remaine, that there may be a continuall fight. Bonaventura writing vpon the same place, saith: Concupiscence importeth in the vnregenerate an immoderate desire of commutable good, in such sort as to captivate reason, and to pervert the soule, so that it must preferre commutable good, before that which is in∣commutable: this concupiscence cannot be found in any, but it must make him, in whom it is, guilty of condemnation; the strength of this concupis∣cence, is so broken and ouerthrowne, by the grace of regeneration, that it hath no power to captiuate reason, to pervert the soule, & bring vpon it a ne∣cessitie of preferring things finite before infinite; and so the guilt of condem∣nation is taken away: but it hath still power to moue and sollicite vs to euill, and we by Gods grace haue power to resist & ouercome. For as the Master of the sentences saith in the same place; though concupiscence remaine after Bap∣tisme, yet doth it not rule & raigne as before, but it is diminished, weakned, & made lesse forcible, that it may rule no longer, vnlesse any man will giue

strength vnto his enimy, by going after the lusts thereof.

So that it is euident, that the Church of God taught as wee do, that concu∣piscence in it owne nature is a sinne, making guilty of grieuous punishment: that when it is weakned, and ceaseth to be so potent as formerly it was, yet it ceaseth not to be of the same kind that formerly it was, as n 1.391 Gregorius Ariminensis sheweth: and therefore seeing it was before a sin, it is still in some sort a sin that God hating it before, he hateth it still: & we also are to hate it, & by all meanes to seeke to weaken and destroy it. o 1.392 Cassander sayth, that a very worthy and fa∣mous diuine affirmeth, that it is sin in the regenerate, though it be not imputed. And he addeth that the difference between them that say it is sin; and them that say it was sin properly, & made guilty of condemnation, but now being weake ned, & the guilt taken away, it is not properly sinne, is a meere logomachia.

And therefore in the conference at Wormes, the colloquutors agreed tou∣ching this point: p 1.393 the forme of their agreement is this; We confesse with vna∣nimous

consent, that all that come of Adam according to the ordinary course, are borne in originall sinne and vnder the wrath of God. Originall sinne is the priuation and want of originall righteousnes, ioyned with concupiscence. We agree also, that the guilt of originall sinne is remitted in baptisme, together with all other sinnes, by the merit of Christs passion. But we thinke that con∣cupiscence, a vice or fault of nature, an infirmity and disease, remaineth: taught soe to thinke, not only by the apostolicall scriptures, but by experience also. And touching this disease wee agree, that that which is materiall in originall sinne, remaineth in the regenerate, that which is formall being taken away by baptisme. And wee call that the materiall part of originall sinne, that tooke beginning from sin, that inclineth vnto sinne, and repugneth against the law of God, as Paul also calleth it: and in this sort it is briefely sayd in the Schooles, that the materiall part of originall sinne, remaineth in the baptized: and that the formall is taken away: By the formall part of sinne they vnderstand the

priuation or want of those diuine graces, that should cause the knowledge, loue, and feare of God, the inordinate inclination to loue ourselues and finite things, so as not to regard God, and the consequent guilt of condemnation accompany∣ing such priuation and inordinate inclination: by the materiall part they vnder∣stand, not concupiscence as it is in strength, captiuating all to the sinister loue of our selues, and things finite: but as weakened it still solliciteth to evill, but so that easily it may be resisted, if wee make right vse of the grace, that God hath giuen vs: this remainder of concupiscence is euill, inclineth to euill, God hateth it, and we must hate it &c. And therefore it is most absurd that the coun∣cell of Trent hath, that God hateth nothing in the regenerate, and the reason they giue is very weake, that therefore he hateth nothing in them, because there is no condemnation vnto them: for many things may be disliked, in them that shall not be condemned.

It remaineth that wee speake concerning first motions, Bonauentura descri∣beth * 1.394 first motions to be, the motions of sensuality according to the impulsion of concupiscence, impetuously tending to the fruition of a delectable creature. First motions (saith hee) are either primò primi, or secundò primi: primò primi sunt naturales, secundò primi sunt sensualitatis: primò primi sequuntur naturalium qualitatum actionem, secundò primi imaginationem: these first motions hee pro∣nounceth to be sinne for three causes. First, because they moue to that which they should not, and to that which is vnlawfull. Secondly because they are in a sort voluntary: though not in themselues, yet in that they are not hindred by the will, or in respect of precedent apprehension. Thirdly, they are sinne in re∣spect of delight annexed: for when the soule is ioyned by delight to the creature, it is darkned and made worse, as when it is ioyned to God, it is inligh∣tened and bettered. These sayth he are veniall sinnes, because the will hath not a compleate dominion ouer these motions of sensuality, as ouer those acts that

proceed from the command of the wil, but yet it might haue hindered them, & therefore they are veniall sins; & so they continue, so long as they stay & pro∣ceed not so farre as to haue the willes consent; but if they proceede so farre, as that the will consenteth to take delight therein, though not to proceede to ac∣tion, it is a mortall sinne. This is the opinion of Bonauenture a cardinall and a canonized Saint, and with him agree sundry others: soe that in this point, the Church formerly taught as wee do now.

CHAP. 9.

Of the distinction of veniall and mortall sinne.

BEllarmine saith, that the Romanists with one consent do teach, that some sinnes in their owne nature, (no respect had to predestination, or repro∣bation; * 1.395 to the state of men regenerate, or not regenerate) are mortall, o∣ther veniall; and that the former make men vnworthy of the fauour of God, and guilty of eternall condemnation; the other onely subiect them to tem∣porall punishments and fatherly chastisements. But wee knowe the Church of God beleeued otherwise. For first, b 1.396 Gerson proueth, that euery offence against God, may iustly be punished by him in the strictnesse of his righteous iudg∣ment, with eternall death, yea with vtter annihilation; because there is no pu∣nishment so euill, and so much to be auoyded, as the least sinne that may be ima∣gined. So that a man should rather choose eternall death, yea vtter annihilation, then committe the least offence in the world. Secondly he proueth the same, because all diuines do agree, that wheresoeuer there is eternity of sinne, there must be eternity of punishment; now where there is no remission, there sinne must of necessity remaine for euer: for though sinne soone cease in respect of the act, yet euery sinne remaineth after the act is past, in respect of the staine and guilt, till it be remitted; whence it followeth, that euery sinne in it owne nature, and without grace to remitte it, remaineth eternally, and deserueth eternity of punishment and is mortall.

Wee say therefore that some sinnes are mortall and some veniall, not because some deserue eternity of punishment, and others do not; for all deserue eternity of punishment, and shall eternally be punished, if they remaine without grace, and vnremitted eternally: but because some sins, either in respect of the matter wherein men do offend, or ex imperfectione actus, in that they are not commit∣ted with full consent, exclude not grace, the roote of remission, and pardon, out of the soule of him that committeth them: whereas other, either in respect of the matter wherein they are conuersant, or the full consent wherewith they are committed, cannot stand with grace. Soe that, contrary to Bellarmines positi∣on, no sin is veniall in it owne nature, without respect had to the state of grace. And this is proued against him, by the authority of such mē, liuing in the Church in the dayes of our fathers, as he must not except against. c 1.397 Thomas Aquinas saith, eternity of punishment answeareth not to the grieuousnesse of sinne, but to the eternall continuance of it without remission: and that therefore, eternity of pu∣nishment is due, to every sinne of the vnregenerate so continuing, ratione con∣ditionis subiecti, in respect of the condition and state of him that committeth it, in whom grace is not found, by which only sinne may be remitted. Whence it will follow, that euery sinne of the vnregenerate so continuing, is worthy of e∣ternall punishment, and shall soe be punished, and therefore is mortall: And on the contrary side euery sin of the regenerate, that may stand with grace, and not exclude it, is rightly sayd to be veniall: that is, such as leaueth place for that grace, that can and will procure remission: of which sort are all the sins of the e∣lect of God, called according to purpose, which are not cōmitted with full con∣sent.

Cardinall Caietan writing vpon those words of Thomas Aquinas, cleareth this point exceeding well:

Grace onely, saith hee, is the fountaine whence floweth remission of sinne: nothing therefore positiuely maketh sin veniall, or remissible, but to be in grace: nor nothing maketh a sin positiuely irremissi∣ble, or not veniall, but the being out of the state of grace: for to be in the state of grace, is to haue that which will procure remission of sin, & to bee out of the state of grace, is to be in a state wherein remission cannot be had. So that that which positiuely maketh sin veniall, or not veniall, is the state of the subiect wherein it is found: if we respect therefore the nature of sin, as it is in it selfe, without grace, it will remaine eternally in staine, & guilt, and so will subject the sinner to eternall punishment: so that euery sin in it selfe, deserueth eter∣nall punishment and is mortall: but yet such is the nature of some sinnes, either in respect of the matter wherein they are conversant, or their not being done with full consent, that they doe not necessarily imply an exclusion of grace, out of the subiect in which they are found, & so doe not necessarily put the doers of them, into a state positiuely making them not veniall, by remouing grace the fountaine of remission. So that to conclude, no sin is positiuely veni∣all, as hauing any thing in it that may claime remission: for no sinne implyeth or hath any thing in it of grace the fountaine of remission: but some sin either ex genere, or ex imperfectione actus, in respect of the matter wherein a man offendeth, or in that it is not done with full consent, to the exclusion of grace, may bee saide to bee remissible or veniall, negativè, per non ablatio∣nem principii remissionis, in that it doeth not necessarily imply the exclu∣sion of grace the fountaine of remission: and some sinnes either in re∣spect of the matter, or manner, doe imply such exclusion, and are therefore named mortall.

d 1.398 Richardus de Sancto Victore agreeth with the former, and more clearely confirmeth our opinion then they doe. The circumstances of that wee finde in him touching this point are these: One had written vnto him desiring to be resolued in a certaine doubt; the doubt was this: how it could bee true, that hee had learned of his teachers, that veniall sinnes deserue onely temporall punishments, & mortall eternall; whereas yet in those that goe to hell, if any of those sinnes that they call veniall bee found, they must bee punished, and euery punishment sustained in hell, is eternall, seeing out of hell there is no re∣demption; whence it will follow, that euen those sinnes that are named veni∣all, deserue eternall punishment: for they are punished eternally in the dam∣ned, and it must not bee thought, that the punishment inflicted for them, is more then they deserue. All this concerning the eternity of the punishment of euery sinne of the reprobate, hee acknowledgeth to bee true: and there∣fore sheweth that some sinnes are said to bee veniall, and mortall: but for other considerations then some supposed. His resolution therefore of the doubt proposed is expressed in these words,

That sinne seemeth vnto mee to bee veuiall, which found in the regenerate in Christ, of it selfe alone neuer bringeth vpon them eternall punishment, though they repent not particular∣ly of the same: & that is mortall, which though it be alone, bringeth e∣ternall death vpon the doers of it, without particular repentance: that there∣fore is a veniall sin, which of it selfe alone, & if there be nothing else to hinder, is euer sure to be pardoned and remitted in the regenerate, so as neuer to bring condemnation vpon them: & that is mortall, that of it selfe alone, putteth the doer into a state of condemnation and death.

Here we see sins are distinguished, some are said to be veniall, & some mortal; but none are said to be veniall, without respect had to a state of regeneration, as Bellarmiue imagineth. To these we may adde e 1.399 Almain and Fisher Bishop of Rochester, and sundry other: but it needeth not; for howsoeuer our Adversaries make shew to the contrary, they all confesse that to bee true that wee say;

for every sinne eternally punishable, deserueth eternall punishment; but euery the least and lightest sin, that wee can commit, without grace, and remission, remaineth eternally in staine and guilt; and is eternally punishable, whence it will follow, that euery sinne deserueth eternall punishment; and so is by na∣ture mortall * 1.400. So that in this poynt as in the former, the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died, is found to haue bin a Protestant Church.

CHAP. 10.

Of free will.

CArdinall Contarenus hath written a most diuine and excellent discourse touching free will; wherein hee sheweth the nature of free will, & how the freedome of will is preserued or lost; in this discourse, First, hee sheweth what it is to be free; and then 2^•, what that is, which wee call free will. What it is to be free, he sheweth in this sort; As he is a servant that is not at his owne dispose to do what he will, but is to do what another will haue him to do, so he is sayd to be free who is at his own dispose, so as to do nothing presently because another will haue him, but what seemeth good vnto himself, & he hath a liking to do. The more therefore that any thing is moued by, & of it self, the more free it is. So that in naturall things we shal find, that according∣ly as they are moued by any thing within or without themselues in their mo∣tions, they come neerer to liberty, or are farther from it: so that a stone is in a sort free when it goeth downeward, because it is carried by something within: but it suffereth violence, and is moued by something from without, when it as∣cendeth: yet doth it not moue it selfe, when it goeth downward, but is moued by an impression of that waight, which it put not into it self, but the authour of nature, & moueth but one way; so that it is far from freedome & liberty euen in this motion also. Liuing things moue themselues; & not one way only, as the former, but euery way; as we see plants, & trees, wherein the first & lowest de∣gree of life is discerned, moue themselues downewards, vpwards, on the right hand, & on the left: yet discerne they not whether, neither do they moue them∣selues out of any discerning, & so are far from liberty. Bruite beasts are moued by themselues in a more excellent sort: for hauing discerned such things as are fitting to their nature & condition, there is raised in them a desire of the same: so that they may very properly & truely be said to moue themselues, because they raise in themselues the desire that moueth them: yet is there no freedome or liberty in them.

For there is no liberty truely so called, but where there is an apprehensiō, not of things of some certaine kind onely, but of all things generally, of the whole variety of things, of the proportion which they haue within themselues, & of the different degrees of goodnes found in them: & answerable herevnto a desire of good in general, & a greater or lesse desire of each good, according as it ap∣peareth to be more or lesse good, and so a preferr•…•…ng of one before another, & a choosing of what it thinketh best. So that reason is the roote of all liberty: for in that reason discerneth good in generall, the will in generall desireth it, in that it sheweth there is a good, wherein there is all good & no defect, the will if it haue any action about the same, cannot but accept it: in that it sheweth that one thing is better then another, the will preferreth or lesse esteemeth it, in that it sheweth some reasons of good, & some defects and evils, the will chooseth, or refuseth: when reason finally resolueth a thing now & in this particular to bee best, the will inclineth to it.

This generality of knowledge is not found in any thing below the condition of man: other liuing creatures haue an apprehension of some certaine things onely; they haue no knowledge of good in generall, but of cer∣taine good things onely, nor no desire of good in generall, in the ex∣tent

of it, but of such particular good things as are fitted to them: these therefore haue neither free and illimited apprehension nor desire of good; but limited, restrained, and shutte vp within a certaine compasse: so that they are like to a man shutte vp in prison, who though hee may moue himselfe and walke vp and downe, yet cannot goe beyond a certaine limitation and bounds set vnto him. But man was made to haue an apprehēsion of all things, to discern the nature of each, and the different degrees of goodnesse found in them: and accordingly to desire good in generall, to desire each thing more or lesse, as it appeareth more or lesse good: neuer to rest satisfied, till he come to an infinite good: to desire the same for it selfe, as originally good, and as the last end, be∣cause aboue or beyond it there is nothing to be desired: & to desire nothing but in reference vnto it, seeing nothing is good but by partaking of it.

And hence it is easy to see, how the liberty of our will is preserued: and how and in what sort it is lost: for seeing the desire of the chiefe good and last end, is the originall of all particular desires: if God be proposed vnto vs as our last end, and chiefe good, in whom, from whom, and for whom all things are: then our will without restraint, and without all going aside, and intangling, or intri∣cating it selfe, shall freely loue whatsoeuer is good: and each thing more or lesse, according as it comes neerer to God, and nothing but that which is pleasing to him: thus is our liberty preserued and continued. But if we depart from God, and make any other thing our chief good, & last end: then we seeke that which is infinite, within the compasse of that which is finite, and soe languish, neuer finding that wee seeke, because wee seeke it where it is not to be found: and besides bring our selues into a strait, soe as to regard nothing though neuer so good, farther then in reference to this finite thing, which wee esteeme as if it were infinite: neither doe wee set vp any other thing vnto our selues to be our chiefe good, but our selues. For as Picus Mirandula noteth, the ground of the loue of friendshippe is vnity: now first God is more neere to euery of vs then we are to our selues: then are wee nearer to our selues, then any other thing: & in the third place there is a nearenesse and coniunction betweene other things and vs. So that in the state of nature instituted, wee loued God first, and before, and more then our selues: and our selues no otherwise but in and for him: but falling from that loue, wee must of necessity decline to loue our selues better then any thing else, and seeke our owne greatnesse, our owne glory, and the things that are pleasing to vs, more then any thing else: and because the soule vnmindfull of her owne worth and dignity, hath demersed herselfe into the body & senses, & is degenerated into the nature and condition of the body, she seeketh nothing more thē bodily pleasures as fitting to her, & declineth nothing more as cōtrary to her, then the things that grieue & afflict the outward man.

This is the fountaine of all the euills that are found in our nature: this put∣teth vs into horrible confusions: for hauing raised our selues into the throne of God by pride, and fancied vnto our selues a peerelesse and incomparable great∣nesse, wee are no lesse grieued at the good of other men: then if it were our e∣vill: nay indeede it is become our euill: for how can our excellence be pearles, and incomparable, if any other excell or equall us, or haue any thing wherein he is not subordinate to us: thus doe wee runne into enuy, and all other euills, and endleslely disquiet and afflict our selues. And secondly wee are hereby depriued of our former liberty; for neither do we know all the variety of good things, as we did, our knowledge being from sense nor their different degrees, that so wee might haue power to desire them, and to preferre each before o∣ther, according to the worth of it; neither can wee desire any good but as ser∣uing our turne; so that what doth not so, we cannot esteeme.

Touching the wil of man since the fall; it is resolued by all diuines, that it hath lost the freedome it formerly had from sinne, and misery; but some vnderstand this in one sort, and some in another. For some affirme, that men haue so farre

forth lost their liberty from sinne by Adams fall, that they cannot but sinne, in whatsoeuer morall act they doe; which thing I shewed to haue beene belee∣ued, by the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died. But they of the Church of Rome at this day, dislike this opinion, for they suppose, that though our will be not free from sinne, so as collectiuely to decline each sinne, and that though in the state wherein presently we are we cannot but sinne, at one time or other, in one thing or other; yet we may decline each particular sinne divisiuely, and doe the true workes of morall vertue. Much contending there is, & hath beene touching freewill; wherefore for the clearing of this point two things are to be noted. 1 from what, and 2^dly wherein this liberty may be thought to be.

The things from which the will may be thought to bee free are fiue. 1 The authority of a superiour commander, and the duty of obedience. 2^ly The inspe∣ction, care, gouernment, direction, and ordering of a superiour. 3^ly Necessity, & that either from some externe cause enforcing, or from nature inwardly de∣termining, and absolutely mouing one way. 4^ly, Sinne, & the dominion of it. 5^ly Misery. Of these fiue kindes of liberty, the 2 first agree only to God, so that in the highest degree 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, freedome of will, is proper to God only; and in this sense Calvin and Luther rightly deny, that the will of any creature is, or euer was free. The third kind of libertie, is opposite not only to coaction, but naturall necessitie also: In opposition to coaction, the vnderstanding is free; for howsoeuer a man may be forced, to thinke & beleeue, contrary to his incli∣nation, that is, such things as he would not haue to be true; yet the vnderstan∣ding cannot assent to any thing contrary to her owne inclination, for the vnder∣standing is inclined to thinke so of things as they are, & as they may be made to appeare vnto her to be, whether pleasing to nature or not: but the vnderstan∣ding is not free from necessitie.

But the will in her action is free, not onely in opposition to coaction, but to naturall necessity also. Naturall necessitie consisteth herein, that when all things required to inable an agent, to produce the proper effect thereof are pre∣sent, it hath no power not to bring forth such effect, but is put into action by them. So the fire hauing fit fuell in due sort put vnto it, & being blowed vpon, cannot but burne. The libertie of the will therefore appeareth herein, that though all those things be present, that are pre-required to inable it, to bring forth the proper action of it, yet it hath power not to bring it forth, and it is still indifferent & indeterminate, till it determine and incline it selfe; God in∣deed worketh the will to determine it selfe; neither isit possible that hee should so worke it, and it should not determine it self accordingly; yet doth not Gods working vpon the will, take from it the power of dissenting, and doing the contrary; but so inclineth it, that hauing libertie to doe otherwise, yet shee will actually determine so.

Here Luther, and Calvin are charged with the denyall of this libertie of the will; & many strange absurdities are attributed to them; for first Luther is said to haue affirmed, that the will of man is meerely passiue; that it produceth not any act, but receiueth into it such acts, as God alone without any concur∣rence of it, worketh & produceth in it. But all this is nothing but a meere ca∣lumniation; for Luther knoweth right well, that men produce such actions as are externally good & euill, willing, & out of choice; & confesseth that we doe the good things that God commandeth vs, when we are made partakers of his grace, but that God worketh vs to doe them; Wee beleeue, we feare, we loue: but it is God that worketh vs to beleeue, feare, & loue. Certum est nos facere cùm facimus, saith Saint f 1.401 Augustine, seà Deus facit ut faciamus. It is most certain that we doe those things we are said to doe, but it is God that maketh vs to doe them, not only by perswading, inviting, & inwardly drawing vs by morall in∣ducements, but by a true & reall efficiencie. So that according to Luthers opi∣nion, we moue not but as moued; nor are actiue, but as hauing first bin passiue:

nor turne our selues, but as first wrought vpon, and made to turne: yet doe wee truely moue our selues, and truely, freely, and cheerefully choose that which is good, and turne ou rselues from that which is euill, to that which is good. g 1.402 Diuines say that * 1.403 facere vt velimus, and facere ipsum velle, differ very much: that is, they say it is one thing to make vs to will, and another to produce the acte of willing. God worketh both, but in a different sorte, the first sine nobis facientibus nos velle: Secundum autem operatur, nobiscum simul tempore consenti∣entibus & cooperantibus; that is, God worketh the first of these alone; we make not our selues to will, the second hee produceth together with vs, willing that hee would haue vs, and producing that wee doe. So that in the former consi∣deration wee are meerely passiue, in the latter actiue: which neither Luther nor any of his followers ever denyed. Calvine, they say, confesseth, that the will concurreth actiuely to the acte which God produceth; but without a∣ny freedome at all: vnlesse wee speake of that freedome, which is from coacti∣on. It is true indeede that Calvine denyeth vs to bee free from necessity: but hee speaketh of the necessity of sinning; but hee neuer denyeth vs to bee free * 1.404 from naturall necessitie, that is, from being put into action, so as naturall agents are, that is, without all choyce and liking ofthat wee incline to doe. It is evi∣dent that Calvine confesseth the will of man to bee free to doe euill; and he de∣nyeth it not to bee free to performe acts civilly good, or morally good ex gene∣re, & obiecto; yea hee thinketh that the will freely and out of choyce, willeth whatsoeuer it willeth; as in the state of auersion it freely willeth that it should not, so when God conuerteth it, hee turneth the course of the actions and de∣sire of it, and maketh it freely and out of choyce to turne to good. i 1.405

That men haue lost the freedome from sinne, and put themselues into a ne∣cessity of sinning Saint * 1.406 Augustine sheweth: Libero arbitrio male vtens homo, & se perdidit, & ipsum: sicut enim qui se occidit, vtique vivendo se occidit, sed se occidendo non vivit, nec seipsum potest resuscitare cum occiderit: ita cum libero peccaretur arbitrio, victore peccato, amissum est & liberum arbitrium, à quo enim quis devictus est, huic & servus addictus est. Quae sententia cum vera sit, qualis quaeso potest servi addicti esse libertas, nisi quando eum peccare delectat? Liberali∣ter enim seruit, qui sui domini voluntatem libenter facit. Ac per hoc ad peccandum liber est, qui peccati servus est; vnde ad iustè faciendum liber non erit, nisi à pecca∣to liberatus; esse institiae caeperit servus. Ipsa est vera libertas propter rectè facti k 1.407 laetitiam, simul & piaservitus propter praecepti obedientiam. Sed ista libertas ad bene faciendum, vnde erit homini addicto & vendito, nisi redimat ille cuius illa vox est, si vos filius liberaverit, verè liberi eritis? Quod antequam fieri in homine incipiat, quomodo quisquam de libero arbitrio in bono gloriatur opere, qui non∣dum liber est ad operandum benè: nisi se vanâ superbiâ inflatus extollat, quam cohibet Apostolus dicens, Gratiâ salui facti estis per fidem?

Here wee see necessity of sinning, and freedome from naturall necessity, doe stand together in the corrupted nature of man: * 1.408 Nescio quo prauo & miro modo ipsa sibi voluntas peccato quidem in deterius mutata, necessitatem facit; vt nec necessitas cum voluntaria sit, excusare valeat voluntatem; nec volnntas, cum sit illecta, excludere necessitatem. Est enim necessitas haec quodam modo voluntaria: est favorabilis vis quaedam, premendo blandiens, & blandiendo premens; volun∣tas est quae se cum esset libera servam fecit peccati, peccato assentiendo; voluntas ni∣hilo minus est, quae se sub peccato tenet voluntariè serviendo. Vide quid dicas, inquit aliquis mihi: tune voluntarium dicis, quod iam necessarium esse constat? Verum quidem est quod voluntas seipsam addixerit, sed non ipsa se retinet, magis retinetur & nolens. Bene hoc saltem das, quod retinetur. Sed vigilanter retine volunta∣tem esse, quam retineri fateris. Itaque voluntatem nolentem dicis? Non vtique voluntas retinetur non volens: voluntas enim volentis est, non nolentis. Quod 〈◊〉〈◊〉 volens retinetur, ipsa seretinet. Quid ergo dicet, aut quid respondebit ei, cum ipsa fecerit? Quid fecit? Seruam se fecit; vnde dicitur, qui peccatum facit, servus

est peccati. Propterea cum peccauit (peccauit autem, cum peccato obedire decre∣vit) servam se fecit. Sed fit libera si non adhuc facit. Facit autem in eâdem servitute se retinens: neque enim non volens voluntas tenetur: voluntas enim est. Ergo quia volens, servam seipsam fecit: non modo fecit, sed facit. Sed non me, inquis, decredere facies necessitatem quam patior, quam in memetipso experior, contra quam & assiduè luctor. Vbinam quaeso hanc necessitatem sentis? Nonne in voluntate? Non ergo parum firmiter vis, quod & necessario vis. Multum vis quod nolle nequeas, nec multum obluctans. Porro vbi voluntas, & libertas; quod tamen dico de naturali, non de spirituali, quâ libertate (vt dicit Aposto∣lus) Christus nos liberauit. Nam de illâ idem ipse dicit: vbi spiritus Domini, ibi libertas. Ita anima miro quodam & malo modo, sub hâc vo∣luntariâ quâdam & malè liberâ necessitate, & ancilla tenetur & libera: ancilla propter necessitatem, libera propter voluntatem: & quod magis mirum, magisque miserum est, eò rea quo libera, eoque ancilla quo rea; ac per hoc eo ancilla, quo libera. And afterward, Non quod volo hoc ago, sed me non alio prohibente: & quod odi illud facio, sed me non alio compellente. Atque vtinam haec prohibi∣tio & haec compulsio, ita esset violenta, vt non esset voluntaria: forsitan enim sic possem excusari: aut certe ita esset voluntaria, vt non violenta: profecto enim sic possem corrigi.

It is true that naturall men may doe things that are good ex genere & obie∣cto, and performe such externall actions, as serue to entertaine this present life; but to doe any thing morally good, not onely ex genere & obiecto, but ex fine & ci cumstantiis, there is no power left in corrupted nature. It is excellent to this purpose that wee reade in Saint l 1.409 Augustine: Per velle ma∣lum, rectè perdidit posse bonum, qui per posse bonum, potuit vincere velle ma∣lum. Per peccatum igitur liberum arbitrium hominis possibilitatis perdidit bo∣num, non nomen & rationem. Esse fatemur liberum arbitrium omnibus ho∣minibus, habens quidem iudicium rationis, non per quod sit idoneum, quae ad Deum pertinent, sine Deo aut inchoare aut certe peragere: sed tantum in ope∣ribus vitae praesentis, tam bonis, quam etiam malis. Bonis dico, quae de bono naturae oriuntur; id est, velle laborare in agro, velle habere amicum, velle habere in∣dumenta, velle fabricare domum, artem discere diversarum rerum bonarum, velle quicquid bonum ad praesentem pertinet vitam &c. Malis vero dico, vt velle ido∣lum colere, velle homicidium. And againe, de verbis apostoli serm: 13. Agis quidem Deo non adiuvante liberâ voluntate, sed male. Ad hoc idonea est volun∣tas tua, quae vocatur libera, & malè agendo fit damnabilis ancilla. Cum dico ti∣bi sine adiutorio Dei nihil agis, nihil boni dico: nam ad malè agendum habes sine adiutorio Dei liberam voluntatem; quanquam non est illa libera. A quo enim quis devictus est, huic & servus addictus est: & omnis qui facit peccatum, servus est peccati. And againe contraduas epistolas Pelag: ad Bonifacium lib: 1. c. 3. Ar∣bitrium in bono liberum non erit, quod liberator non liberauerit, sed in malo libe∣rum habet arbitrium. And afterward, Haec voluntas quae libera est in malis, quia delectatur malis, ideo libera in bonis non est, quia liberata non est. And againe, De gratia & libero arbitrio, lib. 1. cap. 15. Semper est in nobis voluntas libera, sed non semper est bona. Aut enim à iustitiâ libera est, quando seruit peccato, & tunc est mala: aut à peccato libera est, quando seruit iustitiae, & tunc est bona. Gratia vero Dei semper est bona, & per hanc fit vt sit homo bonae voluntatis, qui prius fuit malae voluntatis. And in his booke de correptione & gratiâ, cap. 1. Liberum arbitrium & ad malum, & ad bonum faciendum confitendum est nos ha∣bere: sed in malo faciendo liber est quisque iustitiae, servusque peccati: in bono autem liber esse nullus potest nisi fuerit liberatus. And ad Bonifacium, lib. 3. cap. 8. Liberum arbitrium captivatum non nisi ad peccatum valet, ad iustitiam vero nisi

divinitus liberatum, adiutumque non valet. Again, epistola 107. ad Vitalem: Liberum arbitrium ad diligendū Deum primi peccati granditate perdidimus. m 1.410 Ariminensis saith, Voluntas determinata est ad malum actum, scilicet quod si sine speciali Dei auxilio eliciet actum, utique eliciet malum. And I haue shewed that many other concurred with him. It is excellent there∣fore that n 1.411 Augustine hath. Ergo damnas (inquit Pelagianus) opera liberi arbitrij? Audi haeretice stulte, & inimice fidei veritatis: Opera liberi ar∣bitrij bona, quae ut faciant praeparantur per gratiae praeventū, nullo liberi arbi∣trij merito, & ipso faciente, gubernante, & perficiente, ut abundent in libero arbitrio non damnamus, quia ex his vel huiusmodi homines Dei iustificati sunt, iustificantur, iustificabuntur in Christo. Damnamus verò authoritate divinâ opera liberi arbitrij quae gratiae praeponuntur, & ex his tanquam me∣ritis, in Christo iustificari extolluntur. o 1.412 Ariminensis: Ex his infero corolla∣rium; quod nemo potest mereri primam gratiam de condigno, nec etiam de congruo, contra aliquorum sententiam modernorum: nomine autem gratiae intelligo quodcunque Dei speciale adiutorium ad benè operandum. p 1.413 Bona∣ventura. Sciendum quod habilitatio sive praeparatio ad gratiam triplex est; scilicet Efficiens, formalis, materialis; prima est à Deo, secunda à gratiâ gratis datâ; tertia à nobis. Anima namque habet facultatem & instrumenta cognoscendi & diligendi Deum ex Naturâ; sed non habet cognitionem veri∣tatis, & ordinem dilectionis nisi ex gratiâ.

In another place he hath these wordes, q 1.414 Libertas arbitrij triplex est, scilicet à necessitate, à peccao, à miseriâ. Prima libertas est naturae, secunda, gratiae: tertia, gloriae: item prima est bonorum & ma∣lorum, secunda est tantummodò bonorum, tertia est in coelo regnantium. Li∣bertas malorum est velle peccare, & etiam posse peccare. Liberum arbitrium liberius est in bonis, quàm in malis, quia in bonis est tantummodo servitus miseriae, in malis autem est servitus miseriae & peccati: sed in patriâ est liber∣rimum, quoniam omnis talis servitus destruetur. Nota quod licet Deus non possit malè facere & similiter Angelus, & animae beatae, tamen est in eis libe∣rum arbitrium: quia bonum eligunt, & malum declinant, non ex infirmá ne∣cessitate, sed liberâ voluntate. Eodem modo dicendum est de diabolo, quòd ha∣bet liberum arbitrium, bonum tamen semper respuit, & malum eligit: sed hoc non facit in eo violenta coactio, sed voluntaria obstinatio. Liberum arbitrium habet se in quibusdam indifferentèr ad bonum & ad malum, ut in primis pa∣rentibus ante lapsum: in quibusdam plus se habet ad malum, quàm ad bonum, ut in regeneratis per baptismum: in quibusdam plus se habet ad bonum quàm ad malum, ut in sanctificatis in utero: in quibusdam necessariò se habet ad malum, ut in infidelibus non regeneratis: in quibusdam necessario se ha∣bet ad bonum, ut in confirmatis, sicut fuit beata Virgo post conceptionem filij.

And in another place. r 1.415 Homo pronior ad malum quàm ad bonum; & hoc multis de causis. Primò quia sicut dicitur: corpus quod corrumpitur, ag∣gravat animam trahens illam ad malum, & non sic erigens ad bonum. Secundò Quia sicut dicit Augustinus: plus valet malum inolitum, quám bonū insoli∣tum. Tertiò, Quia naturalitèr facilius est descendere, quàm ascendere: & unus magis trahit deorsam, quàm decem sursum. Quartò, quia incitans ad malum praesens est, sed finis virtutum incitans ad bonum absens est. Delecta∣bile autem apprehensum persensum, vel imaginationem, quasi de necessitate

movet concupiscentiam. Quintò, quia plures circumstanti'ae requiruntur ad bonum, quam ad malum. Sextò, quia tendimus ad nostrum principium, sci∣licet ad nihilum. 7^o Quia fomes, qui mouet ad malum semper intra nos est: gloria vero quam quaerimus extra nos est. 8o Quia vires animae sunt actiuae ad diligendum temporalia: sed passiuae & materiales ad ea, quae sunt gratiae & gloriae. Quia non possunt haberi virtutes per modum acquisitionis, sed per modum receptionis. Vnde malum possumus facere per nos, sed bonum non pos∣sumus facere sine gratiâ adiutrice.

Peter s 1.416 Lombard, proposing the question whether all the intentions, and actions of them that lacke faith be sinne, hath these words; Si sides intentionem dirigit, & intentio bonum opus facit; vbi non est fides, nec inten∣tentio bona, nec opus bonum esse videtur. Quod à quibusdam non irrationabi∣liter astruitur, qui dicunt omnes actiones & voluntates hominis sine fide ma∣las esse, quae fide habitâ bonae existunt, vnde Apostolus ait, Omne quod non est ex fide peccatum est. Quod exponens Augustinus ait, Omnis infidelium vita pec∣catum est, & nihil bonum est sine summo bono: vbi deest agnitio aeternae ve∣ritatis, falsa virtus est etiā in optimis moribus. Et Iacobus in epistolâ canoni∣câ ait, Qui offendit in vno, scilicet in charitate, factus est omnium reus. Qui ergo fidem & charitatem non habet, omnis eius actio peccatum est, quia ad cha∣ritatem non refertur. Quod enim ad charitatem non refertur (vt supra meminit Augustinus) non fit quemadmodum fieri oportet, ideoque malum est. Non ergo mandata custodit, qui charitate caret, quia sine charitate nullum mandatorum custoditur. Impossibile est (vt ait Apostolus) sine fide aliquid placere Deo. Quae ergo sine fide fiunt, bona non sunt: quia omne bonum placet Deo. His autem obijcitur quod supra dixit Augustinus, scilicet quod in seruili timore, etsi bonum fiat, non tamen benè: nemo inui∣tus bene facit, etiamsi bonum est quod facit. Hic enim dicit bonum fieri sed non benè, ab illo qui charitatem non habet. Qui enim seruiliter ti∣met chiritate uacuus est: de quo tamen hic dicit, quia bonum facit, sed non benè. Qui etiam super illum locum Psalmi. Turtur inuenit sibi nidum v∣bireponat pullos suos dicit, quod Iudaei, haeretici, & Pagani opera bona fa∣ciunt, quia vestiunt nudos, & pascunt pauperes, & huiusmodi, sed non in nido ecclesiae, id est, in fide: & ideo conculcantur pulli eorum. Quibus illi respondent, dicentes bona opera appellari huiusmodi, quae sine charitate siunt, non quia bona sint quādo sic siunt, quod euidenter supra Augustinus docuit: sed quia bona essent, si aliter fierent: quae in suo genere sunt bona, sed ex affectu sunt mala. But he sayth, there are others of another opinion, making the actions of men to be of three sorts, & denying all the actions of infidels to be sinne. Opera cunsta quae ad naturae subsidium siunt, semper bona esse astruunt. Sed quod a 1.417 Augustinus mala esse dicit, si malas habeant causas; non ita accipi∣endum est, quasi ipsa mala sint: sed quia peccant, & mali sunt, qui ea ma∣lo fine agunt.

Thomas Bradwardin in his summe against the Pelagians of his time, cleerely resolueth, that the will of man since the fall, hath noe power to bring forth any good action, that may bee morally good, ex fine & circumstanti•…•…s. And Aluarez, though hee thinke that all the actions of infidels are not sinne, yet sayth, that none of them is truly an act of vertue, noe not in respect to the * 1.418 last naturall end. c 1.419 CASSANDER sayth, that the article of the

Augustane confession touching originall sinne, agreeth with the do∣ctrine of the Church, when as it teacheth that the will of man hath some kinde of liberty, to bring forth a kinde of ciuill iustice, and to make choyce in things subiect to reason: but that without the spirit of God, it hath no power to doe any thing that may bee just before God, or anything spiritually iust. And all orthodoxe divines agree against the Pelagians, that it is the worke of grace, that wee are made iust of vnjust, truely, and before God; that this grace createth not a new will, nor constraineth it against the liking of it, but corre∣cteth the depravation of it, and turneth it from willing ill, to will well; draw∣ing it with a kinde of inward motion, that it may become willing of vnwil∣ling, and willingly consent to the divine calling.

The Pelagians the enemies of Gods grace, being vrged with those texts of Scripture, wherein mention is made of grace, sought to avoyde the evidence of them, affirming that by grace, the powers, faculties, and perfections of na∣ture, freely given by God the Creator at the beginning, are vnderstood; when this would not serue the turne, they vnderstood by grace the remission of sins past, and imagined that if that were remitted wherein wee haue formerly of∣fended, out of that good that is in nature wee might hereafter so bethinke our selues, as to doe good & decline euill. Thirdly, When this shift failed like∣wise, they began to say, that men happily will not bethinke themselues of that duety they are bound to doe, or will not presently and certainely discerne what they are to doe without some instruction or illumination; but that if they haue the helpe of instruction and illumination, they may easily out of the strength of nature decline evill, and doe that they discerne to be good. Against this it is excellent that Saint Bernard hath, Non est eiusdem facilitatis, scire * 1.420 quid faciendum sit, & facere. Quoniam & diversa sunt, caeco ducatum, ac fesso prae∣bere vehiculum Non quicunque ostendit viam, praebet etiam viaticum itineranti: aliud illi exhibet qui facit ne deviet, & aliud qui praestat ne deficiat in viâ. Itanec quivis doctor statim & dator erit boni, quodcunque docuerit. Porro duo mihi sunt necessaria, doceri, ac iuvari; tu quidem homo rectè consulis ignorantiae, sed si ve∣rum sentit Apostolus, spiritus adiuvat infirmitatem nostram. Immo vero qui mihi per os tuum ministrat consilium, ipse mihi necesse est ministret per spiritum suum adiutorium, quo valeam implere quod consulis.

When they were driven from this device also, they betooke themselues vnto another; to vvit, that the helpe of grace is necessary, to make vs more ea∣sily, more constantly, and vniuersally to doe good, then in the present state of nature vve can; and to make vs so to doe good, as to attaine eternall happines in heauen. And this is, and vvas the opinion of many in the Roman Church, both aunciently, and in our time. For many taught that men in the present state of nature as now it is, since Adams fall, may decline each particular sinne, doe vvorkes truely vertuous & good, fulfill the severall precepts of Gods law, ac∣cording to the substance of the vvorke commaunded, though not according to the intention of the lavv-giver; e 1.421 that they may loue God aboue all, as the au∣thour and end of nature. So that to these purposes there vvas no necessity of the gift of grace, but that grace is added to make vs more easily, constantly, & vniversally to doe good, and to merit heaven. And therefore f 1.422 Stapleton con∣fesseth, that many vvrote vnaduisedly, aswell amongst the Schoolemen here∣tofore, as in our time, in the beginnings of the differences in religion, but that novv men are become vviser. I vvould to God it vvere so, but it vvill bee found, that hovvsoeuer they are in a sort ashamed of that they doe, yet they persist to doe as others did before them: for g 1.423 they teach still that men may de∣cline each particular sinne, doe the true vvorkes of morall vertue, doe things the lavv requireth, according to the substance of the things commaunded, though not so as to merit heauen, or neuer to breake any of them. h 1.424 Bellarmine indeede denyeth, that vvee can loue God aboue all in any sorte, vvithout the

helpe of grace. But i 1.425 Cardinall Caietan saith, that though vvee cannot so loue God aboue all, as to doe nothing but that vvhich may be referred to God as the last end, yet so as to doe many good things in reference to him as the last end. And Bellarmine if he deny not his owne principles must say so; for first he defendeth, k 1.426 that man may doe a worke morally good without grace, and doe it to obey God the author of nature: And elsewhere he proueth, l 1.427 that man cannot perpetually doe well in the state of nature without grace, because it is so turned away from God to the creature by Adams sinne, & specially to him∣selfe, that actually, or habitually, or in propension, hee placeth his last end in the creature, & not in God: & so cannot but offend, if he bee not watchfull against this propension. Whence it followeth, that seeing a man must place his chief good in God, if he doe good, & that naturally he can doe good, he can naturally place the same in God. That which he some-where hath, m 1.428 that it is enough to intend the next end explicitè, & that it will of it selfe be directed to GOD the last end, seeing euery good end moueth virtute finis ultimi, is idle: for it moueth not but virtute finis ultimi amati: nam finis non movet nisi amatus, ergo amat finem ultimum.

So that many formerly, & almost all presently in the Church of Rome, are more then Semipelagians, not acknowledging the necessitie of grace to make vs decline euill, & doe good, but to doe so constantly, vniversally, & so as to merite heauen: But Augustine, Prosper, Fulgentius, Gregory, Beda, Bernard, Anselme, Hugo, many worthy Divines mentioned by the Master of Senten∣ces, yea•…•…he Master himselfe, Grosthead, Bradwardine, Ariminensis, the Catho∣lique Divine that Stapleton speaketh of, those that Andradius noteth, Alva∣rez, and other, agree with vs, that there is no power left in nature to avoide sin, & to doe any one good action, that may be truely an action of vertue, & there∣fore they say, grace must change vs, and make vs become new men.

n 1.429 Cardinall Contarenus noteth, that the Philosophers perceiuing a great in∣clination to euill to be found in the nature of mankind, thinking it might bee altered & put right, by inuring them to good actions, gaue many good pre∣cepts & directions, but to no purpose: for this euill being in the very first spring of humane actions, that is, the last end chiefly desired, which they sought not in God, but in the creature, no helpe of Nature or Art was able to remedie it: as those diseases of the body are incurable, which haue infected the fountaine of life, the radicall humiditie. GOD onely therefore who searcheth the secret & most retired turnings of our soule & spirit, by the inward motion of his holy spirit, changeth the propension & inclination of our will, and turneth it vnto himselfe. And in o 1.430 another place, he hath these wordes.

Wee must obserue that at this present, the Church of God by the craft of the diuell, is divided into two sects, which rather doing their owne busines then that of Christ, & seeking their owne glory, more then the honour of GOD & the profite of their neighbours, by stiffe & pertinacious defence of contrary opinions, bring them that are not wary and wise to a fearefull downefall. For some vaunting themselues to be professours of the Catholique Religion, & enemies to the Lutherans, while they goe about too much to maintaine the libertie of mans will, out of too much desire of opposing the Lutherans, oppose themselues a∣gainst the greatest lights of the Christian Church, and the first & principall teachers of Catholique verity, declining more then they should vnto the heresie of Pelagius. Others when they haue beene a little conversant in the writings of S. Augustine, though they haue neither that modestie of minde, nor loue towards God, that he had, out of the pulpit propose intricate things, & such as are indeed meere paradoxes to the people. So that touching the

weakenes of nature, & the necessitie of grace, we haue the consent of all the best and worthiest in the Church, wherein our Fathers liued and died.

The nextthing to be considered is, the power of freewill in disposing it selfe to the receipt of grace. p 1.431 Durandus is of opinion, that a man by the power of free will, may dispose and fitte him selfe for the receipt of grace, by such a kind of disposition, to which grace is to be giuen by pact, and diuine ordi∣nance, not of debt. Amongst the latter diuines there are that thinke, that as one sinne is permitted that it may be a punishment of another, soe God in respect of almes, and other morall good workes done by a man in the state of sinne, vseth the more speedily and effectually to helpe the sinner, that hee may rise from sinne; and that God infallibly and as according to a certaine lawe, giueth the helpes of preuenting grace, to them that doe what they can out of the strength of nature: & this is the merit of congruence, they are wont to speake of in the Roman Schooles.

But as I noted before, Gregorius Ariminensis resolutely rejects the conceipt of merit of congruence. Stapleton saith it is exploded out of the Church. And q 1.432 Aluarez, that S. Augustine, & Prosper, whom Aquinas & the Thomists follow, reiect the same. August. l. 2. contra duas epistolas Pelagii c. 8. Si sine Dei gratià per nos incipit cupiditas boni, ipsum caeptum erit meritum, cui tanquam ex debi∣to, * 1.433 gratiae veniat adiutorium, ac sic gratia Dei non gratis donabitur, sed meritum nostrum dabitur. &c. 6. lib. 4. & lib. de praedest. sanctorum: & de dono perseue∣rantiae. Et Prosper lib de gratiâ & libero arbitrio ad Ruffinum, ait; Quis ambi∣gat tunc liberum arbitrium cohortationi vocantis obedire, cum in illo gratia Dei affectum credendi, obediendique generauerit? Alioquin sufficeret moneri hominem, non etiam in ipso nouam fieri voluntatem, sicut scriptum est, Praeparatur voluntas à domino. Neque obstat (sayth r 1.434 Aluarez) quod idem Salomon Prouerb. cap. 16. inquit, hominis est praeparare animam. Intelligit enim hominis esse, quia libere producit consensum, quo praeparatur ad gratiam: sed tamen id efficit, supposito au∣xilio speciali Dei inspirantis bonum & interius mouentis, sic explicat istum lo∣cum August. lib. 2. contra duas epistolas Pelag. cap. 8. And so those words are to be vnderstood, If any one open the doore I will enter in, Reuela. 3, and Isa•…•… 30. The Lord expecteth that he may haue mercy on you: for he expecteth not our consent, as comming out of the power of nature, or as if any such con∣sent were a disposition to grace, but that consent hee causeth in vs. Ful∣gentius lib de incarnatione cap. 19. Sicut in nativitate carnali omnem nascentis hominis voluntatem, praecedit operis diuini formatio: sic in spirituali natiuitate, quâ veterem hominem deponere incipimus. Bernard, de gratiâ & libero arbitrio, in initio: Ab ipsâ gratiâ me in bono praeuentum agnosco, & provehi sentio, & spero perficiendum. Neque currentis, neque volentis, sed dei miserantis est. Quid igitur agit ais liberum arbitrium? breuiter respondeo: saluatur; tolle libe∣rum arbitrium, non erit quod saluetur, tolle gratiam non erit vnde saluetur, o∣pus hoc sine duobus effici non potest: uno á quo fit, altero cui vel in quo fit, Deus author est salutis, liberum arbitrium tantum capax; nec dare illam nisi Deus, nec capere valet nisi liberum arbitrium: quod ergo a solo Deo, & soli datur libero ar∣bitrio, tam absque consensu esse non potest accipientis, quam absque gratiâ dantis, & ita gratiae operanti salutem cooperari dicitur liberum arbitrium, dum consentit, hoc est, dum saluatur: consentire enim saluari est.

Yet must we not thinke that God moueth vs, and then expecteth to see whe∣ther wee will consent: Concilium Arausicanum Can. 4. Si quis vt a peccato purgemur voluntatem nostram Deum expectare contendit, non autem vt etiam pur∣gari velimus, per sancti spiritus infusionem, & operationem in nos, fieri confitetur: re∣sist it ipsi spiritui sancto, per Salomonem dicenti, praeparatur voluntas a domino, & Apostolo salubriter praedicanti Deus est qui operatvr in nobis, & velle & perficere pro boná voluntate. Soe that God doth not stirre and moue the will, and soe stay to see whether it will consent or nor, but worketh, moueth, and inclineth us to consent. * 1.435

The good vse of grace proceedeth, not from the meere liberty of our will,

but from God working by the effectuall helpe of preoperating grace, and cau∣sing a man freely to consent and cooperate. If not, God were not the totall cause, which as the first roote bringeth forth all that, which discerneth the righteous from the sinner. Quis te discernit? Our consent, and effect of predestination. The will doth not first begin her determination and consent: The influx of free will into a good action, or the good vse of grace exciting, is supernaturall: as being about a supernaturall obiect, therefore it must proceede from a superna∣turall cause &c: God is a cause, and the first eause: in that a cause, he hath refe∣rence to the effect, in that the first to the second; when therefore by his hel∣ping grace, he worketh together with vs to will and performe, his operation hath a double respect: first to our will, which it effectually moueth to worke this; and secondly to our act of willing which it produceth together with our will: for our will hath no operation but in one respect only, that is, of the act it bringeth forth; but it hath no influence upon it selfe, antecedently to the produ∣ction of the act. So then God is the first determiner of our will; for i•…•… the crea∣ted will originally begin her owne determination, it will follow that it is the first free, the first roote, and the first cause of her owne determination: which must not be granted: for seeing a created thing that is free, is free by participa∣tion, it must of necessity be reduced to a first free, as to a former cause: other∣wise duo prima, principia. Soe that God by his effectuall grace, not onely morally, but truly efficiently, moueth and inclineth the will, to the loue and liking of what hee will, in such sort that it cannot but turne, nor cannot dis∣sent in sensu composito, though it may in sensu diuiso: The meaning of this is, that the effectuall motion of Gods grace, and an actuall dissenting, resisting, or not yeelding, cannot stand together: but the efficacy of Gods grace, and a power of disenting, do stand together. For the efficacie of grace doth not take away the power, but soe directeth the will, as infallibly in such liber∣ty to bring forth that he pleaseth. * 1.436 Est simultas potentiae ad opposita, non autem potentia simultatis ad opposita simul habenda: there is in some created thing at the same time, a possibility of hauing or doing things opposite, as to sitte or walke, but there is no possibility of hauing these together. Soe there is in free will moued by effectuall grace a power to doe, or not to do in sensu di∣uiso, because the efficacy of grace and power of dissenting may stand together, but not in sensu composito, that is, that the motion of grace and actuall dissenting should stand together. This is the opinion of t 1.437 Aluarez and many other op∣posing the Iesuites: neither had Caluin or Luther any other apprehension of these things. So that the necessity, efficacy, power, and working of Gods grace, is rightly deliuered by sundry in the Roman Church euen till this day. It is not to be maruelled therefore if it be sayd, that the Church wherein our Fathers li∣ued and died, beleeued and taught as we now do.

Aloisius Lippomannus, in catenâ, ad lectorem, hath these words. Illud te ad∣monitum esse volumus, vt si in toto hoc opere Chrysostomum aliquando legeris di∣centem, homini quoties is sua attulerit, & conatum omnem fecerit, abundè postea à Deo gratiam suppeditari, caute, & prudenter pium doctorem legas, ne in errorem il∣lum decidas, vt credas gratiam Dei dari propter merita nostra: nam si ex meritis, non est gratia: cum nec istud ipsum sua afferre, & conatum omnem facere, sine prae∣ueniente Dei gratiâ possit esse, juxta illud Psalmi: & misericordia ejus praeueniet me; item{que}, & misericordia ejus subsequetur me in omnibus diebus vitae meae, ac illud sanctae Ecclesiae: tua nos quaesumus domine gratia semper praeueniat & sequa∣tur: cui nos quo{que} scrupulo prouidè occurrentes, in duobus fortassis aut tribus locis paucula quaedam in Chrysostomum apposuimus.

Gocchianus de libertate christianâ l. 2. c. 23. Maria salutatur gratia plena, vt quic quid in eâ & per eam diuina dispositione fieri conspicitur, totum ex dono dei nullis praecedentibus meritis, designetur &c. habes qualiter in exordio humanae re∣parationis praesumpsio humanae facultatis dejicitur. In eo, quod Maria

plena gratiâ nunciatur, praedicatur in eaplenitudo gratiae, ut nihil proprii meriti, sed totum quod in ea est gratia esse designetur. August. in enchirid. Quid humana na∣tura in homine Christo meruit, ut in unitate personae unici filii Dei, singulariter es∣set? Quae bona voluntas? cuius boni propositi studium? quae bona praecesserunt, quibus mereretur iste homo, ut una fieret persona cum Deo? nempè ex quo homo esse caepit, non aliud caepit esse quam Dei filius, idemque hominis filius, &c. Mag∣na hic & sola Dei gratia ostenditur, ut intelligant homines, per eandem gratiam eius se iustificari a peccatis, per quam factum est ut homo Christus nullum habe∣re posset peccatum. Eccehabes in Mediatore Christo gratiam commendatam, qui cum esset unicus Dei filius, non gratiâ, sed naturâ, & ob hoc plenus veritatis, factus est hominis filius; ut esset etiam gratiae plenus, verbum caro factum est. Cùm in Christo in quo omnia instauranda, tanquam in fonte vnde totius humani generis derivatur salvatio, nihil aliud invenitur, quam gratia; unde alicui ali∣quid aliud de proprio potest provenire, per quod potest salvari? Miranda qui∣dem, imò potius miseranda humanae praesumptio facultatis, quae cùm per humi∣litatem gratis salvari possit, propriâ impediente superbiâ salvari non velit, Omnes, inquit Esaias, sitientes venite ad aquas; & qui non habetis argentum & aurum, properate, emite, & comedite, emite absque ullâ commutatione vinum & lac. u 1.438 Idem spiritus movet hominis voluntatem, ut bonum velit quod prius noluit, & bo∣nam voluntatem adiuvat ut bonum volitum ad effectum perducat, nullâ coopera∣tione propriae voluntatis facultatis, sed sanatae & renovatae. x 1.439 Aug. de patientia; Gratia non solùm adiuvat iustum, verum etiam iustificat impium; & ideo eti∣am cùm adiuvat iustum, & videtur eius meritis reddi; nec sic desinit esse gratia, quoniam id adiuvat, quod ipsa est largita. y 1.440 Hugo de Sancto Victore: Benefa∣ciendi tres sunt gratiae; praeveniens, cooperans, & subsequens; prima dat vo∣luntatem; secunda facultatem, tertia perseverantiam. So that in the matter of free will and grace, the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died, is found to haue beene a Protestant Church.

CHAP. 11.

Of Iustification.

THey of the Church of Rome doe teach, that there is a threefold iu∣stification. The first, when a man borne in sinne, and the childe of wrath, is first reconciled to God, and translated into a state of righ∣teousnesse and grace. The second, when of righteous hee becom∣meth more righteous: And the third, when hauing fallen from grace, he is re∣stored againe.

The first Iustification implyeth in it three things, remission of sinnes past, acceptation and receiuing into that fauour, that righteous men are wont to find with God; and the grant of the gift of the holy spirit, and of that sanctifying & renewing grace, whereby we may be framed to the declining of sinne, and the doing of the workes of righteousnesse. These being the things implyed in the first justification of a sinner, it is agreed by all, that when in sorrowfull dislike of former mis-doings wee turne vnto God, all our sinnes past are freely remit∣ted, thorough the benefite of Christs satisfaction imputed vnto vs; as also that for the merite of Christs actiue righteousnes, consisting in the fulfilling of the Law, wee are accepted and finde fauour with God, as if wee had alwayes wal∣ked in the wayes of God, and pleased him. And both these are necessary; a 1.441 for if a man cease to bee an enemie, he doth not presently become a friend; and though hee pardon him that offended him, so as not to seeke revenge of the offence, yet doth it not follow that presently hee receiueth him into fauour; but it is possible hee should neither respect him as an enemie,

nor as a friend; and neither will euill vnto him as to an enemie, nor good as to a friend. So likewise it sufficeth not that God remitte our sinnes, and seeke not our euill, for Christs passion, but it is necessary also that hee bee so reconci∣led, as to embrace vs as freinds, and to doe good vnto vs: this wee haue by the merit of Christs actiue righteousnes, who having a two fold right to heaven, the one of inheritance, because borne the sonne of God; the other of merit, be∣cause he had done things worthy the reward of heauen; made vse onely of the one, and communicateth the other vnto vs. Neither is this all, that the sinner when he is to bee iustified, seeketh after; for hee neuer resteth satisfied, till hee haue not onely obtayned remission of sinnes past, and acceptation with God, but the graunt of the gift of the spirit also, and of that grace that may keepe him from offending God so as formerly, and incline him to doe the things that are pleasing vnto him. And therefore in the conference at b 1.442 Ra∣tisbon, the Diuines of both sides agreed, that no man obtayneth remission of sinnes, nisietiam simul infundatur charitas sanans voluntatem; vt voluntas sana∣ta, quemadmodum ait Augustinus, incipiat implere Legem. Fides ergo viva est, quae, & apprehendit misericordiam Dei in Christo, & credit iustitiam quae est in Christo sibi gratis imputari, & quae simul pollicitationem spiritus sancti, & cha∣ritatem accipit.

So that it is evident that to bee iustified, hath a three fold signification? For first it importeth as much as to bee absolved from sinne, that is, to bee freed from the wofull consequents of that disfauour and dislike, that vnrighte∣ousnes and sinne subjecteth vs vnto. Secondly, To bee accepted and respe∣cted so as righteous men are wont to bee: And thirdly to bee framed to the loue and desire of doing righteously. And in this sort doth Dominicus à Soto explicate this poynt: and with him doe all they agree, who say, that grace doth justifie formaliter charitas operativè, and opera declarativè, that is, that grace doth iustifie formally, charitie as that which maketh men doe the workes of righteous men, and that good workes by way of declaration make it manifest, that they are righteous that doe them. For they vnderstand by grace a state of acceptation, that is, such a condition, wherein men are not disfavoured as hauing done ill, but respected as if they had done all righte∣ousnes: which is in trueth a relation, as the Protestants teach: For what is it but a relation, in reference to another, to bee respected by him, and accep∣ted to him? And in this sense a man may bee iustified, that is, accepted as if hee had neuer done ill, or failed in any good, for the righteousnes of another * 1.443. Nay they all confesse, that all they that are justified, are so accepted, for the obedience, merit, and satisfactory sufferings of Christ, when they are first reconciled to God. So that it is strange that they should vrge as sometimes they doe, that a man canne no more bee justified, that is, ac∣cepted as if righteous, for the righteousnes of another, then a line canne bee, or bee accounted straight, for the straightnes of another: For, as Duran∣dus rightly noteth, though one mans merit and well doing, cannot bee impu∣ted to another, as to bee, or bee accounted his merit, and hee esteemed to haue merited and done well; yet it may bee so communicated, as that the fruite, benefit, & good of it, shall redound to him, & he be accounted worthy respect, for the others sake, as if he had done well. Neither doe they nor can they make any question hereof, if they will but vnderstand what they say; For whereas three things are required of a man, if hee will bee subject to no euil, and enjoy good: viz. not to haue done euill; to haue done good; and to doe good in the present and time to come: though we be framed to the doing of good hereafter, yet wee canne neither bee freed from the punishment our former evill doings

deserued, but by the benefit of his sufferings, that suffered what hee deserued not, to free vs: nor to be accepted hauing done nothing worthy acceptation, but for his merit: who did all good in our nature to procure vs acceptation.

c 1.444 Andreas Vega confesseth that men may be absolued from their sins, that is, freed from the punishment of them, by the imputation of Christs righteous∣nesse: and that they may become acceptable and deare unto God, in such sort as iust men are, formally, by being beloued of him: but that if we speake Philosophycally of iustice, it is in the predicament of quality & not of relation: which we willingly yeeld vnto. And though he say, d 1.445 no man euer in expresse words affirmed before Bernards time, that Christs righteousnesse is imputed to * 1.446 us: yet he thinketh it may rightly be sayd to be imputed, both for satisfaction & merit: that is, so as to free us from punishment, & bring good vpon us, as if we had merited it: and that to these purposes it is imputed to vs, as if it were ours. f 1.447 And farther he addeth, that as God doth nothing in nature, but by his sonne as God: so he will do nothing pertaining to our iustification and restauration, but for him, as he is man: and that there is no benefit bestowed on vs, or good done vnto us, but it presupposeth a newe application, and imputation of the merits of Christ. Soe that euery one is newly made partaker of Christs me∣rits, and oweth newe thankes to him, soe often as new gifts and benifittes, are conferred and bestowed vpon him: and he feareth not to pronounce, that the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed vnto vs, not only when wee are baptized, (as he sayth a man excellently learned vnaduisedly affirmeth,) but in other sa∣craments, and as often as men receiue any newe gift from God: yea that a new * 1.448 imputation of Christs righteousnesse is necessarily required, for the remission of those veniall sinnes, into which the iustified fall, and the freeing of vs from temporall punishments. h 1.449 Bernar: Nemo leuia peccata contemnat, impossibi∣le est enim cum iis saluari, impossibile est ea dilui, nisi per Christum, & à Christo: & i 1.450 August: tam de eo qui leuioribus peccatis obnoxius est, quam de eo qui grauio∣ribus pronunciat: quod si sibi relinquerentur interirent.

All therefore acknowledge, as he thinketh, that the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed; but there are, as he telleth vs, 2 opinions in the Church of Rome touching this point, the one, that Christs righteousnes is no otherwise commu∣nicated or imputed to us, but in that for the merit of it, wee are accepted, all things necessary to fitte vs for iustification are giuen vnto us, righteousnesse making vs formally iust, that is, inclining vs to decline euill & do good, is infu∣sed into vs, and what soeuer is profitable to set vs forward, and to make us con∣tinue in the same, is bestowed on vs.

Others renowned for learning and piety do thinke, that for the attaining of heauen happinesse, not only in a twofold righteousnesse is necessary, the one in∣herent, the other imputed, as to the former; but that this imputed righteousnes of Christ, is twise offered and presented, by Christ to God the Father; First that we may be iustified, that is, that our sinnes may be remitted, we accepted, and renewing grace may be giuen vnto vs. And secondly that we may avoyd and decline, the extremity and seuerity of Gods iudgment, that he may accept our weake indeauours, and admitte vs to heauen, notwithstanding the imperfe∣ction and defects thereof: that for his sake the imperfection & impurity of our righteousnesse may be couered.

This opinion is clearely deliuered by Cardinall k 1.451 Contarenus: & he tellethus it was allowed in the conference at Ratisbon, by the diuines of both sides: his

words are these. Seeing we haue affirmed that we artaine a twofold righteous∣nesse by faith: a righteousnesse inherent in vs, as charity, and that grace where∣by we are made partakers of the diuine nature, and the iustice of Christ giuen and imputed vnto vs, as being graft into Christ, and hauing put on Christ: it remaineth that wee enquire, vppon which of these wee must stay and re∣lie, and by which wee must thinke our selues iustified before GOD, that

is, to be accepted as holy and just, hauing that justice which it beseemeth the sonnes of God to haue. I truely thinke, that a man very piously and Chri∣stianly may say, that wee ought to stay, to stay I say, as vpon a firme and stable thing, able vndoubtedly to sustaine vs, vpon the justice of Christ gi∣uen & imputed to vs, and not vpon the holinesse and grace that is inherent in vs. For this our righteousnes is but imperfect, and such as cannot defend vs, seeing in many things we offend all, &c. But the justice of Christ which is gi∣uen vnto vs, is true & perfect justice, which altogether pleaseth the eyes of God, & in which there is nothing that offendeth God. Vpon this therefore as most certaine & stable, wee must stay our selues, & beleeue that wee are justi∣fied by it, as the cause of our acceptation with God: this is that precious trea∣sure of Christians, which whosoeuer findeth, selleth all that he hath to buy it.

l 1.452 Ruard Tapper followeth the other opinion, and saith, that whereas ac∣cording to Bernard; our righteousnesse is impure, though sincere and true, we must not conceiue that this impurity defileth our righteousnesse, as if it selfe were stayned, or any thing were wanting in it, for so it should not bee true, and right; but that it is saide to bee impure, because there are cer∣taine staines and blemishes together with it, in the operations of the soule; for GOD onely is absolutely free from sinne, and in many things wee sinne all: our righteousnesse therefore according to his opinion, is imperfect in vertue and efficacie, because it cannot expell and keepe out all sinne, out of the soule wherein it is, by reason of the infirmity of the flesh; but the good workes of the just, doe abide the severity of Gods judgment, neither can they bee bla∣med, though tryed most exactly, and discussed in all their circumstances, yea though the divell should be permitted to say what he can against them, for they haue no fault nor deformitie.

Here for the better clearing of this point, it is to bee obserued, that it is confessed by all, that the most righteous liue not without sinne, & consequent∣ly that they haue need continually of remission of sinnes.

It is resolued amongst all Catholiques, saith m 1.453 Andreas Vega, that there was neuer any found amongst the Saints, the blessed Virgin onely excepted, that in the whole course of their liues, avoided all veniall sinnes.

n 1.454 Iob asketh who shalll be cleane from filthinesse? and answereth himselfe, according to the translation which the ancient Doctors followed, & namely Cyprian, Am∣brose, Augustine, Gregory, and others, no one though he liue but one day vpon earth. And o 1.455 Dauid saith generally, no man liuing shall bee justified in thy sight, and in another place, for this impiety of sinne shall euery holy one

pray vnto thee: hee saith not euery sinner, but euery holy one (saith

Saint p 1.456 Augustine) for it is the voice of the Saints, If we say wee haue no sinne, we deceiue our selues, & there is no trueth in vs, and Solomon saith, there is no man righteous on earth, that doth good, and sinneth not; and those say∣ings of the Apostles are well knowne; in many things wee sinne all: If wee say wee haue no sinne, wee deceiue our selues, &c. And who is hee that neuer needed in his whole life to say that part of the Lords Prayer, forgiue vs our trespasses?

And all this is strongly proued, in that if wee looke on the liues of all the Saints, which are marvailously commended in Scripture, we shall finde none of them that had not some blemish, as in the most beautifull body. Let vs begin with the more ancient, for we intend not to accuse the just, but to shew the infirmitie of man, and the mercie of GOD, vpon, and towardes all. Enoch, as Ecclesiasticus testifieth, pleased GOD, and was translated in∣to paradise, but in that it is written in Genesis, hee pleased GOD, af∣ter he begat Methusalem, q 1.457 Basil doth not without cause collect, that hee formerly did not so please GOD; and the same Basil saith, that that great Father of the faithfull, is found to haue beene some-where vnfaithfull:

and not without cause, for when God first promised Isaak vnto him, though he fell on his face, yet he laughed in his heart, saying, thinkest thou that a sonne shall bee borne, to him that is an hundred yeares old, and that Sarah who is ninety yeares old shall bring forth? Wherevpon Hierome speaketh of Sarah and him in this sort; they are reproved for laughing, and the very cogitation and thought is reprehended, as a part of infidelity; yet are they not condem∣ned of infidelity, in that they laughed, but they receiued the garland of righte∣ousnes, in that afterwards they beleeued. Besides these the Scripture giueth ample testimony, to Noah, Daniel, & Iob, who onely in Ezechiel it saith, may escape the anger of God ready to come on men; & yet Noah fell into dr•…•…nken∣nes, which is a sinne; and Daniel professeth he prayed vnto the Lord, and con∣fessed his owne sinne, and the sin of his people: Iob also is commended in the Scripture, and of God himselfe, as being a sincere man, righteous, fearing God, and departing from euill, and that not in an ordinary sort, but so as that none of the most righteous then in the world, might be compared vnto him, as S^t Austine rightly collecteth, out of the words of God vnto Satan: This man though hee were a singular example, of innocencie, patience, and all holines, and though hee indured with admirable patience, horrible tribulations and trials, not for his sinnes, but for the manifestation of the righteousnes of God; yet as Augustine and Gregorie (who as loud sounding trumpets set forth his prayses) freely confesse, hee was not without veniall sinne. Which thing is strongly confirmed, in that the same most sincere louer of righteousnes, con∣fesseth of himselfe, saying, r 1.458 I haue sinned, what shall I doe vnto thee ô thou •…•…eeper of men? And being reproued by the Lord, and in a most mild sort wil∣led, to say what hee could for himselfe, hee answered without any circuiti∣on, that he had spoken foolishly: and therefore the Scripture as it were care∣fully declining, the giuing occasion to any one, to attribute so great innocen∣cie to Iob, as to make him sinles, sayd not, that he sinned not, but that hee sin∣ned not in all those things, that hee suffered before that time, when he answe∣red his wife, if wee haue receiued good things of the hand of the Lord, why should we not patiently suffer the evils he bringeth vpon vs? s 1.459 Moses belo∣ued of God & men, and the most meeke of all the inhabitants of the earth, t 1.460 doubted something of the promise of the Lord, when hee stroke the rocke twise with the rodde, to bring out water for the people, being distressed for want of water: and that his doubting, displeased the Lord God, and hee let him know so much, both by reprouing him and punishing him, and therefore presently he sayd to him & Aaron, because yee beleeued mee not, to sanctifie mee before the children of Israel, you shall not bring in this people, into the land which I will giue them. The Scripture also highly commendeth Samu∣ell, but as August: noteth; that neither hee, nor Moses, nor Aaron, were * 1.461 without sin, David sufficiently declared, when he said; thou wast mercifull vnto them, and didst punish all their inventions, for as August: noteth, he pu∣nisheth them that are appointed to condemnation in his wrath, the children of grace in mercy, but there is no punishment, no correction, nor no rod of * 1.462 God due, but to sinne. Zacharie and Elizabeth are renowmed for eminent righteousnes, for they are both sayd to haue beene iust before God, walking in all his commandements without reproofe; but that Zacharie himselfe was not without fault & sinne, Gabriel shewed when hee sayd vnto him, behold thou shalt be silent, and not able to speake. And the same may be proved out of Paul who sayth, that Christ onely needed not daily as the priests of the law, to offer sacrifice first for their owne sinnes, and then for the sinnes of the people. And it is one thing (as the fathers of the councell of Mileuis, haue well noted, in their epistle to Innocentius) to walke without sinne, & another thing to walke without reproofe, for he that walketh so, that no man can iust∣ly complaine of him, or reprehend him, may bee said to walke without re∣proofe,

though sometimes thorough humane frailety, some lighter sinnes doe seize vpon him; because men doe not reproue, nor complaine, but onely of the more greivous sinnes. And to what end should wee runne thorough other examples of the Saints? Whereas the lights of the world, and salt of the earth, the Apostles of Christ, that receiued the first fruits of the spirit, confessed of themselues, that in many things they offended and sinned.

And therefore the Church taught this euer with great consent.

a 1.463 Tertullian: Quis hominum sine delicto? b 1.464 Cyprian proveth by Iob, Dauid, and Iohn, that no man is without sinne, and defiling: c 1.465 Hilarie vpon those words, thou hast de∣spised all them that depart from thy righteousnes; If God should despise sin∣ners he should despise all; for there is none without sinne, d 1.466 Hierome shewing that the Ninivites vpon good ground and for good cause, commaunded all to fast, both old and young, writeth thus; The elder age beginneth, but the young∣ger also followeth in the same course, for there is none without sinne, whether he liue but one day or many yeares; for if the starres be not cleane in the sight of God, how much lesse a worme, rottennes, and they that are holden guilty of the sinne of Adam, that offended against God. And in another place, wee follow the authority of the Scripture, that no man is without sinne. * 1.467 And f 1.468 Saint Augustine; whosoeuer are commended in Scripture, as hauing a good heart, and doing righteously, and whosoeuer such after them, either now are, or shall be hereafter, they are all truely great, iust, and praise worthy, but they are not without some sinne, nor no one of them is so arrogantly mad, as to thinke he hath no need, to say the Lords prayer, and to aske forgiuenes of his sinnes. And in his 31 sermon de verbis Apostoli, he hath these words: Hae∣hetici

Pelagiani & Coelestiani dicunt iustos in hac vitâ nullum habere peccatum, redi haeretice ad orationem, si obsurduisti contra veram fidei rationem, Dimitte no∣bis debita nostra dicis an non dicis? Si non dicis, etsi praesens fueris corpore, foris ta∣men es ab ecclesiâ. Ecclesiae enim oratio est, vox est de magisterio Domini veni∣ens. Ipse dixit, sic orate, discipulis dixit, Apostolis dixit, & nobis qualescunque agniculi sumus dixit, arietibus gregis dixit, sic •…•…rate. Videte quis dixerit & qui∣bus dixerit, Veritas discipulis, pastor pastorum arietibus dixit, sic orate, Dimitte nobis debita nostra; &c: Rex militibus, dominus servis, Christus Apostolis, veritas hominibus loquebatur, sublimitas humilibus loquebatur. Scio quid in vobis agatur. Ego vos appendo, ego de trutinâ meâ renuncio, prorsus dico quid in vobis agatur. Hoc enim ego plus quam vos scio, dicite, Dimitte nobis debita nostra sicut &c: O∣ratio ista regeneratorum est, id est, baptizatorum: Postremo quod totum superat filiorumest. Nam si non est filiorum, quâ fronte dicitur Pater noster? &c.

And in his retractations he saith expressely, no man doth so keepe the mandates of * 1.469 righteousnes, as that it should not bee needefull for him in praying to say, for∣giue vs our debts. And h 1.470 els-where; that amongst those three articles, which the Church defendeth against the Pelagians, one is, In quantâcunque iustitiâ,

sine qualibuscunque peccatis, in hoc corruptibili corpore neminem vivere.

i 1.471 Basil: No speech is so profitable vnto me, as that touching repentance, because there is no man without sinne. k 1.472 Gennadius: There is no holy nor iust man that is without sinne; yet doth hee not therefore cease to be holy. l 1.473 Gregorie inqui∣reth how that may be vnderstood, that Iob sayth; his heart reproued him not; whereas before he had accused himselfe saying, I haue sinned: and he profes∣seth, that if he shall goe about to iustifie himselfe, his owne heart will con∣demne him: and he answereth himselfe in this sort; that there are sinnes that may be avoyded by the iust, and that there are some that even the righteous cannot decline; of the first kinde he sayth it is to thinke euill, of the second to consent to euill thoughts. Rightly therefore he that confesseth himselfe a sinner saith, his heart reproued him not, because though sometimes happily he were wanting in rectitude, in that hee thought euill, yet by a strong fight of the minde hee resisted the same. m 1.474 Bernard. Ipsi de se fatentur apostoli in mul∣tis

offendimus omnes, & si dixerimus, quia peccatum non habemus, ipsi nos

seducimus; that is, the Apostles confesse of themselues, in many things wee sinne all, and if wee say, wee haue no sinne, wee deceiue our selues. o 1.475 August. treating of those words, that wee may bee holy and vndefiled.

Hoc agitur, inquit, ut hoc simus, si immaculati intelligendi sunt, qui omninò sine peccato sunt; si autem immaculati sunt, qui sunt sine crimine, etiam in hâc vitâ fuisse atque esse, negare non possumus: legitur homo sine crimine, legitur sine querelâ; at non legitur sine peccato, nisi filius hominis, unus idemque filius Dei unicus. And p 1.476 Gre∣gory: In hâc vitâ multi sine crimine, nullus verò esse sine peccatis valet.

* 1.477 Yea the Fathers teach, not onely that no man doth, but also that no man can liue without veniall sinne. q 1.478 Hilary in illa verba, amputa à me opprobrium, &c, Propheta in corpore positus loquitur, & neminem viventium scit sine pec∣cato esse posse. Augustin, Homil. 2. in Apocalyps. Non Angels indigent poenitentiâ sed homines, qui sine peccato esse non possunt, & subiungit. Non dicam Laici, sed etiam Sacerdotes, unâ die esse non debent fine poeniten∣tia, quia quomodò nullus dies est, in quo homo possit esse sine peccato, sic nullo die debet esse sine satisfactionis remedio. Et de bono perseverantiae cap. 13. citat ex Ambrosio, & approbat, Cauere difficile; exuere autem impossibile surreptiones, in quibus dubium non est, quandoque nos peccare venialiter. In lib. de fide ad Petrum cap. 41. ut firmissimè tenendum traditur, neminem ex adultis sine peccato esse posse. Gregorius homil. 17. in Evangel; Humana vita sine culpa transiri non potest. Et alibi, Etiam a iu∣st is peccata haec minuta asserit inevitabilia 18, Moral. c. 4. Beda in illa verba, Ecce agnus Dei. Quamdiu sunt sancti in hoc corpore, peccato carere nequeunt. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Bernard. in lib. de praecepto & dispens. Fateor sane impossibile cuivis mortali∣um, vel venialiter interdum non delinquere.

And the Councell of Trent anathe∣matizeth all those that shall say, that the justified man may so avoid & de∣cline all veniall sin, as not to commit any in the whole course of his life, vn∣lesse it be by speciall priviledge, as in the blessed Virgin.

But yet Andreas r 1.479 Vega thinketh, that the just by the assistance of Gods grace, may decline all veniall sinne, so as in the whole course of their life to fall into none; which his saying he confesseth, will seeme hard to most men, euen as it seemed formerly to himselfe. But hee saith, if it be not granted that the commaundements of GOD may bee kept collectiuely, as well as divisiue∣ly, then that hee requireth is impossible, for hee requireth the fulfilling of all collectiuely, so as not to doe any of them is sinne. If a man commaund his seruant, to carry so much of something, out of the field into his house euery houre, though hee haue power to carry so much any houre, yet if hee haue not power to carry it euery houre, it seemeth hee requireth that which is impos∣sible, and his mandate is vnjust. And besides, if wee haue power to doe the things the Law requireth, divisiuely onely, and not collectiuely, then we can∣not fulfill the Law, ex toto, sed ex parte tantum, which is the opinion of the Pro∣testants, whom the Councell condemneth.

It is true that he noteth touching this point, that they cannot avoid, but that God hath commaunded things impossible, who say, that men may divisiuely doe each thing the Law requireth, but not collectiuely all the things it requi∣reth, seeing God commandeth vs to doe all these things collectiuely; and yet this is the opinion of most Diuines in the Roman Church. So that they are for∣ced by the evidence of truth, to confesse together with vs, that God hath com∣manded such things, as in the present state, by reason of the infirmity of our sin∣full nature, cannot be fulfilled by vs.

Neither can Vega avoyde the evidence of the testimonies of the Fathers, & the Decree of the Councell of Trent, so that hee must bee forced to confesse, that no man can so collectiuely fulfill the Law as not to sinne, and conse∣quently, that no man can performe that the law requireth. For his distinction of

logicall or metaphysicall, and morall impossibility, will not helpe the matter; for howsoeuer it be true, that God may giue grace, freeing the will, and inabling it to doe good, in such sort as to decline all ill, (and in his opinion euery iustified man might haue such grace, if he were not wanting to himselfe) yet according to the course, which generally he hath, doth, and will euer hold, for reasons best knowne to himselfe, hee giueth not that superexcellent grace, and mans con∣dition is still such, as that continuing in it, hee connot auoyd all sin.

a 1.480 Sapleton treating of the fullfilling of the lawe, layeth downe these propo∣sitions. 1 They that are renewed in Christ Iesus, receiue the grace of the ho∣•…•…y spirit, whereby they may fullfill the lawe, b 1.481 Lex, sayth S. Augustine, data est vt gratia quaereretur, gratia data est vt lex impleretur, & c 1.482 voluntas ostendi∣tur infirma per legem, vt sanet gratia voluntatem, & voluntas sanata impleat legem, non constituta sub lege, nec indigens lege. Item, d 1.483 Lex non evacuatur per fidem, sed statuitur, quia fides impetrat gratiam, quà lex impleatur. e 1.484 Ad praecepta facienda adiuuat per gratiam, sicut promissa implenda curat per verita∣tem. f 1.485 Impletur lex cum vel fiunt quae ibi praescripta sunt, vel cum exhibentur quae ibi Prophetata sunt, gratia pertin•…•…t ad charitatis plenitudinem, verit as ad pro∣phetiarum impletionem, & quia vtrumque per Christum, ideo non venit soluere le∣gem aut Prophetas, sed adimplere.

This first proposition hee qualifieth by a second, in this sort. Haec impletio * 1.486 legis non intelligitur, necessario & praecise, in omnibus mandatis legis, toto tempore & cursu iustitiae humanae, sed ille censetur implere, qui voluntatē & affectū habens implendi, vniuersa legis eatenus implet, quatenus humana fragilitas, in reli∣quiis naturae corruptae, per gratiam adiuta implere in hac vita vel potest, vel solet. And this proposition he sayth is clearely proued, and strongly confir∣med, by the knowne doctrine of the Church, h 1.487 long since clearely deliuer∣ed against the Pelagians, that none of the iust do liue without sinne. Where∣as therefore, it is sayd of Zachary and Elizabeth, that they were both iust be∣fore God, walking in all the commandements, and iustifications of the Lord, without blame; and of Dauid, that hee was a man after Gods owne hart, do∣ing all his will; and of Asa, that hee did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, as Dauid his father did, and that his hart was perfite before the Lord all his dayes, as likewise it is sayd of Iehosaphat, Ezechias, Iosias; It is not to bee vnderstood that they were soe iust, as to be without sinne, for the sinnes of them all are recounted in scriptvre. Zachary was incredulous, and therefore became dumbe; the adultery and murder of David are well knowne; i 1.488 Iehosaphat is reprehended by the Prophet for helping wicked A∣hab: k 1.489 Ezechias fell through the pride of his hart; Iosias sinned grieuously, in not resting in the words of Necho, 2 Chron. 35. But they are sayd to haue beene iust, because they had a desire to fullfill all, though through frailty they offended in many things. l 1.490 Hierome sheweth that men are soe iust in this life, as that yet they are not without sinne, Positum, inquit, est in no∣strâ potestate non peccare, sed hoc pro modo, & tempore, & conditione humanae fra∣gilitatis, perpetuitas autem impeccantiae, soli Deo reservatur, nec quia ad bre∣ue tempus abstinere possum, coges me vt possim iugiter, & dicimus hominem posse non peccare si velit, sed hoc pro tempore, pro loco, pro imbecillitate coporis, quamdiu intentus est animus, quamdiu chorda nullo vitio laxatur in cithara. And Saint Augustine. Nullus sanctus & iustus caret peccato, nec tamen ex hoc desinit esse iustus, cum affectu teneat sanctitatem. * 1.491

Thirdly to this proposition hee addeth in the same place, That the iust though they be not without sinne yet decline those that are mortall, or if * 1.492 at any time they fall into them they rise againe by repentance.

o 1.493 Fourthly, though the righteousnesse of the iust be not perfect in this world, so as to be free from all mixture of sinne, yet it is perfect suo modo, in that

it continually endevoureth to bee free from sinne, going on from day to day.

p 1.494 Haec est perfectorum vera iustitia, vt nunquam praesumant se esse perfectos: ne ab itineris nondum finiti intentione cessantes, ibi incidant in deficiendi periculum, vbi proficiendi deposuerint appetitum. q 1.495 Quantumcunque hic profecerimus, nemo dicat sufficit mihi, iustus sum, qui sic dixit remansit in viâ, non novit pervenire. Vbi di∣xit sufficit ibi haesit.

r 1.496 Fiftly, Iustit ia bonorum operum in fide, est vera coram Deo iustitia, vtcunque mixta peccatis & imperfecta, tum quoad vniuersa mandata implenda, tum quoad modum implendi, verèque & plenè legi Dei satisfacit, non solum quia quam proxi∣mè arcedit ad plenam & perfectam iustitiam, aut quia grauioribus saltem crimini∣bus caret, aut etiam quia id agit proficiendo de die in diem, vt omni prorsus pecca∣to careat, & plene satisfaciat, sed adhuc praeterea, quia quicquid deest ad plenam, & perfectam adimpletionem, mandata praetermittendo, & frequenter venialiter peccando, sive propter imperfectionem, in modo & ratione implendi, id totum Chri∣sti misericordia & gratia indulget, atque ignoscit, facitque indulgendo, vt perinde simus coram Deo iusti, ac si vntuersa ad amussim omnia mandata, eademque per∣fectissimè fecissemus.

This doctrine of Stapleton thus deliuered, is such as no Protestant can dislike, neither can he dissent from them, if hee constantly persist in the same, but that hee may make shew of some difference betweene him and them, hee sayth, that a three fold fraude of the Protestants touching remission of sinnes, is to bee a∣voyded. First, In that they make our iustification, so consist in the sole remis∣sion of sinnes by faith, that the sacraments conferre nothing to our justificati∣on. But this is vntrue, for they teach no such thing, but that baptisme and repentance, are necessarily required, in them that are to bee first iustified. The second supposed fraude is, that actions of vertue, and the carefull indeavour to walke in the commaundements of God, are not necessary to our second justifi∣cation, or the augmentation, progresse, and daily perfecting of the same more and more. But this is a calumniation as the former; for they make the second justification, to consist of two parts. The daily progresse in well doing, whereby the righteousnes inherent is more and more perfected. And the daily remission of such sinfull defects, as are found in their actions. Neither do they say, that mortall sinnes, and such as doe vastare conscientiam, stand with iustification; and therefore the daily remission which the iustified man seek∣eth, is not of those. The third fraud, to wit, that this remission of sinnes is obtayned by faith onely, without all those meanes that are necessary to attaine the same, is but his owne imagination; for howsoeuer faith onely apprehend this remission, yet other things necessarily concurre, as fitting to the receiuing of the same.

Hitherto wee haue strongly proued that no man can liue in this world with∣out veniall sinne, and consequently that no man fulfilleth the law exactly. Wee haue likewise shewed that the best learned in the Roman Church doe thinke, that the iustified doe so fulfill the law, as that they haue need of continuall re∣mission of sinnes. Onely onething may be alleadged against this that wee haue hitherto insisted vpon, * 1.497 that veniall sinnes are not against but besides the law, that they are improperly sinnes, and that they doe not offend nor displease God, and that therefore the committing of those no way hindereth, but that the fulfilling of the law may bee accounted perfect. But s 1.498 Andreas Vega learnedly refuteth this fancie, and sheweth at large, that they are properly and absolute∣ly sinne, for that they are actus mali simpliciter, quippe qui voluntarij & circa

materiam indebitam, & à rectâ ratione deviant, ac dissentiunt, & poenâ, ac repre∣hensione digni iure apud omnes censentur. And sundry others agree with him in the same. So that it is cleere, that though the gift of righteousnes be giuen to the iustified, and they inclined to doe the things the law requireth, yet it doth not make them to decline all euill, or to doe all good that the lawe requi∣reth, but so to decline euill, as not to suffer it to bee predominant, and so to doe good, as principally to delight in well doing, and aboue all things to desire to please God.

Onely one thing remaineth that is questionable, whether the good workes of the iustified bee sinne or not. That they are wee haue the testimony of t 1.499 Gre∣gory, Sanctus vir omne meritum virtutis nostrae vitium esse conspicit, si ab interno arbitro districtè iudicetur, ideo recte subiungit, si voluerit contendere cum eo, non poterit ei respondere vnum pro mille, et 9. Moral. c. 28. Quamvis lamentis supernae compunctionis infundar: quamvis per studia rectae operationis exe•…•…cear, in tuâ ta∣men munditiâ, video quia mundus non sum. Intentam quippe in Deum animam, ip∣sam adhuc corruptibilis caro diuerberat, eiusque amoris pulchritudinem, obscaenis & illicitis cogitationum motibus faedat. Et 9. Moral. c. 14. Omnis humana iusti∣ua iniustitia conuincitur si districtè iudicetur: prece ergo post iustitiam indiget, vt quae succumbere discussa poterat, ex solà iudicis pietate convalescat.

And u 1.500 Vega confesseth, that not onely the life of all the holiest in this world, is stayned with many veniall sinnes, but also that the good workes of the most perfect, come short of that goodnes, with which it were fit, wee should wor∣shippe, prayse, and honour God, they are not so pure, so holy, so fervent, as the greatnes of God and of his benefits bestowed on vs, might iustly require and exact of vs.

x 1.501 Stapleton sayth Non est tanta eorum iustitia vt vel sine peccato semper sit, vel nihil illi addi queat. y 1.502 August: contra Coelestium, In illâ plenitudine cha∣ritatis praeceptum illud implebitur, Diliges Dominum Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo, & ex totâ animâ tuâ, &c: Nam cum est adhuc aliquid carnalis concupiscentiae, quod vel continendo fraenetur, non omnimodo ex totâ animâ diligitur Deus. z 1.503 Propter concupiscentiam minuitur, distrahitur, & impe∣ditur illa dilectio. Non amatur Deus perfectè ex tota anima in hac vita: non quia avertitur à Deo, sed quia avocatur, non quia à Deo abstrahitur, sed quia distrahitur. Denique non quia charitas Dei per hunc conflictum tolli∣tur, sed quia vsus ipsius charitatis impeditur, vt scitè distinguit Thomas 2. 2, q. 44. ar. 4. ad 2. Fit autem haec avocatio, haec distractio, haec diminutio delecta∣tionis sanctae in ipsà animâ, quia sine animâ caro non concupiscit, quamvis caro concupiscere dicatur, quia carnaliter anima cōcupiscit. a 1.504 Concupiscētia inquan∣tum inest nocet, non quidem ad perdendum de sorte sanctorum nisi ei consenti∣atur, tamen ad minuendam spiritualem delectationem sanctarum mentium, illam scilicet de quâ dicit Apostolus, Condelector legi Dei secundum interio∣rem hominem. There is an imperfection in our loue of God, and wee come short of that which the Law requireth of vs, for we should loue him so, as to loue or desire nothing more, nothing so much, nothing but for him, nothing that he would not haue loued, nothing otherwise then he would haue vs: but this wee doe not, therefore we breake this law. Their b 1.505 answere is, that these lawes doe onely teach vs, what we are to desire, and what we are hereafter to attaine, but doe not binde vs vnder the paine of sinne. If wee aske them why, they answere, because our nature is so corrupted, that we cannot fulfill them, and thus doth Stapleton answere this question; but himselfe presently sheweth the insufficiency of this answere, for he telleth vs out of August: that the righte∣ousnes of the first man was such, as to obey God, and to haue no lawe

of concupiscence, De peccat: merit: & remission. lib. 2. cap: 23. And out of the same August. De Ciuitate Deil. 14. c. 10 Erat amor eius imperturbatus in Deum, that is, he was wholly carried vnto God without distraction or pertur∣bation. And addeth, that this primitiue righteousnes, (which the law of nature bound man to haue,) the law was to prescribe and require, quia ideo data est, vt extinctam propemodum naturae legem in hominibus restauraret; August. qu: in vetus testiment. q. 4. And that the rule of the lawe, which is a perpetuall and immutable lawe of iustice in God, was not to be altered or any way bowed and iuclined in respect of the deprauation of our nature; He sayth therefore that the rule, without any change remaineth the same, and commandeth all manner of perfection: and that not to haue the perfection it requireth, is a transgressi∣on of the law, in all them that by Adams sinne are so corrupted, vnlesse this cor∣ruption be remitted. So then this law bindeth the vnregenerate; and do the re∣generate owe lesse to God? It remaineth therefore a cleare truth, that the most iust do not performe the workes of vertue, with that purity and fer∣vencie of affection, that the lawe requireth, according to that of S. Paul who confesseth, that what he would do that he did not, and what he would not that he did, that to will, was present with him, but that he found no ability to per∣forme.

Ambrosius de fugâ saeculi citatus ab August. contra duas epist. Pelag. ad Bonifacium lib. 4. cap. 11. hath these words, Frequenter irrepit terrena∣rum illecebra cupiditatum, & vanitatum offusio mentem occupat, vt quod studeas vitare, hoc cogites animoque voluas. Quod cauere difficile est ho∣mini, exuere autem impossibile. Non in potestate nostrâ est cor nostrum, & nostrae cogitationes, quae improuiso offusae, mentem animumque confundunt, atque alio trahunt quam tu proposueris, ad saecularia reuocant, mundana inse∣runt: voluptaria ingerunt, illecebrosa intexunt, ipsoque in tempere quo eleva∣re mentem paramus, insertis inanibus cogitationibus, ad terrena plerumque deijcimur.

And c 1.506 Hierome, Fiat tibi inquit Deus secundum fidem tuam, hanc ego vo∣cem audire nolo, si enim secundum fidem meam fiat mihi peribo. Et certè cre∣do in Deum patrem, credo in deum filium, & credo in Deum spiritum san∣ctum, credo in vnum Deum: & tamen secundum meam fidem nolo mihi fi∣eri. Saepe quippe venit inimicus homo & inter dominicam messem zizania interserit. Neque hoc dico, quod maius quicquam sit quam sacramenti fi∣des, quam puritas animae: sed indubitata ad Deum fides arduè reperitur. Verbi gratiâ dictum sit, vt quod volumus perspicuum fiat, ad orationem assisto, non orarem si non crederem, sed si verè crederem, illud cor quo De∣us videtur mundarem, manibus tunderem pectus, genas lacrimis rigarem, corpore inhorrescerem, ore pallerem, iacerem ad Domini mei pedes eosque fle∣tu perfunderem, crine tergerem, haererem certè trunco crucis, nec prius amitterem, quam misericordiam impetrarem. Nunc vero creberrimè in oratione meâ aut per porticus deambulo, aut de faenore computo, aut abductus turpi cogitatione, etiam quae dictu erubescenda sunt gero. Vbi est fides? sic∣cine putamus or asse Ionam? sic tres pueros? sic Danielem inter leones? sic certè latronem in cruce?.

And this is confirmed by the author of the booke called Scala coeli, written in English long since a manuscript whereof I haue seene, When thou wouldest

haue the mind of thy hart vpward to God in thy prayer, thou feelest so many thoughts in vaine, and of thine owne deedes before done, or what thou shalt

doe, that it cannot be soe: yet doe wee rightly require it should bee soe. Thou shalt loue God with all thy hart, and all thy soule, and thy might, it is im∣possible to any man, to fullfill this bidding so fully as it is sayd, liuing in earth, and yet neuerthelesse our Lord bad vs to loue soe, for this intent as S. Bernard sayth, that we should know thereby our feeblenesse, and then meekly cry mer∣cy, and we shall haue it.

Saint d 1.507 Bernard making two constructions of that precept, Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God &c. The one, that it requireth that we should first tast the sweet∣nesse of the Lord, and loue him as the first thing that is deare vnto vs, and our selues in and for God, no otherwise, as finding nothing in our selues worth re∣garding, but for him, without whom we are nothing. The other, that it requi∣reth us to loue nothing so much as God, to be affected towards him as most worthy to be beloued, & to desire that we might so tast of his goodnesse, as to loue him first, & nothing but for him. The former of these 2 he saith, is impos∣sible to be had in this life. Quis enim sibi arrogare id audeat quod se Paulus ipse fatetur non cōprehēdisse? Nec latuit praeceptorē praecepti pōdus hominū excedere vi∣res, sed iudicauit vtile, ex hoc ipso suae illos insufficientiae admoneri: & vt scirent sanè ad quem iustitiae finem niti pro viribus oporteret. Ergo mandando impossibilia, non praevaricatores homines fecit, sed humiles, vt omne os obstruatur, & subditus fiat omnis mundus Deo. Quia ex operibus legis, non iustificabitur omnis caro coram illo. Accipientes quippe mandatum, & sentientes defectum, clamabimus in coelum, & mi∣serebitur nostri Deus, & sciemus in illâ die, quia non ex operibus iustitiae quae feci∣mus nos, sed secundum suam misericordiam saluos nos fecit.

And that all our best workes are defectiue, and that it is not safe to trust to them; the same Bernard sheweth in his sermon De verbis Apostoli, * 1.508 Per∣fecta & secura gloriatio est, cum veremur omnia opera nostra, sicut testatur beatus Iob de seipso, & cum Esaiâ Prophetâ omnes iustitias nostras, non aliud quam pa∣num menstruatae reputandas esse cognoscimus; nihilominus tamen confidimus etiam, & gloriamur in domino, cuius misericordia tanta est super nos, vt à grauioribus quidem, quae ad mortem peccata sunt, custodiat nos, & tam benignè imperfecti∣onis nostrae delicta, & conuersationis impuritatem nobis manifestare, cognitam condonare dignetur, quatenus in humilitate & sollicitudine, & gratiarum acti∣one firmiter radicati, iam non in nobis, sed in domino gloriemur.

e 1.509 Ruard Tapper sayth, our righteousnesse is imperfect, in vertue and efficacy, in that it cannot expell, and keepe all sinne out of the soule: whence it will follow, that it is sinnefully defectiue in it selfe. For righteousnesse keepeth out sinne by way of contrariety, and each contrary if it be in such degree as it should, keepeth out the contrary; if therefore it be in such degree as it should be, it will suffer no sinne. For God requireth of vs an intire obedience; and as hee that will leaue a sinne in such sort as hee should, must leaue all: soe he that will haue any one vertue so as he should, must haue all, and consequent∣ly can haue noe sinne. Bellarmine de justificat: lib: 4. cap: 14: sayth, He that keepeth the whole law, and offendeth in any one, is guilty of all, and that there∣fore if those sinnes which wee call veniall, (as many the best in the Roman Church defend,) be simply and absolutely sins, and violations of the law, who∣soeuer committeth any one of them and breaketh the law in so doing, is in a sort guilty of the breach of all, and keepeth noe one of them as hee should.

Wherefore by the cleare confession, of many the worthyest in the Church in former times, and by necessary consequence from that all taught, it is eui∣dent, that our righteousnesse is imperfect, not onely by reason of the mixture of sinnes, but of the sinnefull defect and imperfection, found in the good workes which wee doe Which thing Augustine long since excellently deliuered, ad Bonifacium lib. 3. cap. 7. Virtus quae nunc est in

homine iusto, hactenus perfecta nominatur, ut ad eius perfectionem pertineat etiam ipsius imperfectionis, & in veritate agnitio, & in humilitate confessio. Tunc enim est secundum hanc infirmitatem, pro suo modulo perfecta, ista par∣va iustitia, quandò etiam quid sibi desit intelligit. & 1 Retract. c. 19. Omnia mandata facta deputantur, quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur. & in Confess. Vae hominum vitae quantumvis laudabili si remotâ misericordiâ iudicetur.

Wherefore seeing it is clearely confessed, that the righteousnesse of the iust is impure, as Bernard speaketh, not onely in respect of the mixture of sinne, but of sinfull imperfection, found in the best workes of vertue, done by them. I thinke we may safely follow their opinion who say, that for the attayning of heauen happines, not onely a twofold righteousnesse is necessary, the one inherent, the other imputed, but that this imputed righteousnesse of Christ, is twise offered and presented by Christ to God the Father, first that our sinnes may bee remitted, wee accepted, and renewing grace may bee giuen vnto vs: and secondly, that for his sake the imperfections & defects of our in∣herent righteousnes found in vs, by renewing grace may bee covered, that wee may avoyde the extremity and seuerity of Gods righteous judgement, & that he may accept our weake endeavours, and admit vs into heauen, notwithstan∣ding all our failings.

f 1.510 Pos•…•…idonius writeth of Ambrose, that when he was ready to dye hee vsed these words, Non sic vixi vt me pudeat inter vos vivere: sed nec mori timeo, quia bonum Dominum habemus: and he saith that S. August. when he was now aged, was wont much to admire and praise this saying of S. Ambrose, Ideo enim eum dixisse nec mori timeo, quia bonum Dominum habemus; ne crederetur praefidens de suis purgatissimis moribus praesumpsisse, Non sic vixi vt me pudeat inter vos vivere: Hoc dixerat ad illud quoa homi∣nes de homine nosse poterant. Nam sciens examen aequitatis divinae, de bono Domino se dicit magis, quam de meritis suis confidere: cui etiam in oratione quotidianâ Dominicâ dicebat: Dimitte nobis debita nostra, &c. And Cuth∣bertus that writeth the life of Beda saith, that he also was wont often to repeat this saying of S. Ambrose.

S. Aug. cont. Crescon l. 3. c. 80. speaketh thus, Ad existimationem homi∣num magna testium qui me noverunt suppetit copia, ad Dei vero conspectū sola conscientia, quam contra vestras criminationes, cum intrepidā geram, non me tamen sub oculis omnipotentis iustificare audeo, magis{que} ab illo effluentem mi∣sericordiae largitatem, quam judicij summum examen expecto, cogitans quod scriptum est, Cúm rex iustus sederit in throno, quis gloriabitur castum se ha∣bere cor, aut quis gloriabitur mundum se esse à peccato? Which thing Ger∣son also sheweth De verbis Christi, Venite ad me omnes. Haec & his similia Diabolo tentanti, & peccatum suae diffidentiae vel desperationis ingerere vo∣lenti soleo respondere: ne quando praevaleat inimicus meus super me. At si quando me cogitatio in conspectu divinae maiestatis rapuerit, ibi certè longèa∣liter procedo, quia tunc me pulverē cinerem{que} esse recognosco. Tunc me pecca∣torem miserrimum, & supplicio dignissimum profiteor, & cum omni reveren∣tiâ veniam deprecor. Tunc quasi super terram sto, & alas submitto, quas in al∣tercatione Diaboli quasi in coelo volans extensas teneo: vt semper & coram Diabolo erectus inveniar, & humilis coram Deo.

g 1.511 Of S. Bernard it is reported, cùm extremum iam spiritum trahere vi∣deretur, in excessu mentis suae, ante tribunal domini sibi visus est praesentari,

affuit antem & Satan ex adverso, improbis eum accusationibus pulsans; vbi vero ille omnia fuerat prosecutus, & viro Dei pro suâ fuit parte dicendum, ni∣hil territus aut turbatus ait, Fateor non sum dignus ego, nec proprijs possum meritis obtinere regnum coelorum; caeterum duplici iure illud obtinens Domi∣nus meus, haereditate scilicet patris, & merito passionis; altero ipse contentus, alterum mihi donat, ex eius dono iure illud mihi vendicans non confundor. In hoc verbo confusus inimicus, conventus ille solutus, & homo Dei in se rever∣sus est. h 1.512 Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury bringeth in a godly man thus speaking to the Angels, Quod in regno Dei vestrâ quaerimus aequalita∣te beari, dono & gratiae Iesu Christi Domini nostri id ascribimus: qui ad hoc dignatus est homo fieri, pati, mori, vt nos ab omni delicto, in sanguine suo iusti∣ficatos, ipsius regni consortes efficeret.

And the same Anselme is i 1.513 said, to haue prescribed certaine interrogatories, to be proposed to such as were ready to die, Inter quas extrema est, Credis te non posse nisi per mortem Christi saluari? respondet infirmus etiam. Tum illi dici∣tur: age igitur dum superest in te anima, in hâc solâ morte fiduciam tuum con∣stitue; in nullâ re aliâ fiduciam habe; huic morti te totum committe, hâc solâ tetotum contege, totum te immisce in hâc morte, totum confige, in hâc morte totum involue; & si Dominus Deus voluerit te iudicare, dic: Domine, mortem Domini nostri Iesu Christi obijcio inter me & iudicium tuum: aliter tecum non contendo; & si tibi dixerit quia peccator es, dic: Domine, mortem Domini nostri Iesu Christi pono inter te & peccata mea; si dixerit tibi, quòd meruisti damnationem, dic: Domine, mortem Domini nostri Iesu Christi obtendo in∣ter me & mala merita mea, ipsiusque mortem offero pro merito, quod ego de∣buissem habere, nec habeo; si dixerit, quod tibi est iratus, dic: Domine, mortem Domini nostri Iesu Christi oppono inter me & iram tuam.

And k 1.514 Hosius saith, the booke called Hortulus animae hath the same interroga∣tories; and that the Franciscan Friers observant, had the same in the frierie at Trent, translated into Italian, & that he had seen Sacerdotale Romanum, in which this interrogation is found, Credis non propriis meritis, sed passionis Domini nostri Iesu Christi virtute et merito, ad gloriam peruenire? Respondet infirmus, cre∣do: Iterum sacerdos, Credis quod Dominus noster Iesus Christus pro nostrâ sa∣lute mortuus sit; & quod ex propriis meritis, vel alio modo, nullus possit salua∣ri, nisi in merito passionis eius? Respondet infirmus credo; Et in fine dicit sacer∣dos; si Dominus Deus voluerit te secundum peccata tua iudicare, dicas: Do∣mine Deus, ego pono mortem Domini nostri Iesu Christi inter me & iudicium tuum: et quamuis meruerim aeternam mortem propter peccata mea, interpono tamen meritum passionis eiusdem, loco meriti, quod ego miser habere deberem & non habeo Item, Domine pono eandem passionem & mortem Domini mei Iesu Christi inter me et iram tuam, & in manus tuas Domine cōmendo spiri∣tum meum. l 1.515 There is extant a certaine forme of confession attributed to S Ber∣nard, in which he speaketh to God in this sort, Recordare Domine Iesu, quia tu∣um non est perdere quicquam eorum, quae Pater tuus dedit tibi: quin tibi proprium est misereri semper & parcere, neminem perdere sed salvare; nam Pater tuus misit te in mundum, non vt iudices mundum: sed vt vitam habeamus per te; vt sis propitiatio nostra, & advocatus noster, non contra nos. Quod enim debuimus, tu soluisti, quod peccavimus, tu luisti; quod negleximus, tu supplesti; proficiat ergo nunc Domine, et in extremis meis plenaria, imò superflua satisfactio, amarissima mors tua, & pretium inaestimabile fusi sanguinis tui, cōmemoratio satisfactionis tuae, &c: m 1.516 Ante annos 200, quidam Dominicanus Coloniae, quomodo forēt aegroti consolandi,

docuit his verbis, Morti jam vicinus, prorsus nihil suis bonis operibus confidere debet, nec propter mala diffidere: sed omnem spem in merita Christi, & ejus im∣mensam misericordiam collocare; haec est fides Catholica, & Christiana, quae nemi∣nem fallere potest. So that hetherto wee finde, the Church wherin our Fathers liued and died, was a Protestant Church, and that they were taught to die in the same faith, that wee now are.

But some man will say, howsoeuer these disclaimed all merit, and confidence in workes, as liuing in bad times, wherein iniquity abounded, and charity was waxen cold, yet others of a more excellent quality, pleaded their owne righte∣ousnesse and innocency, desiring to be iudged according to the same. So Dauid Ps. 26. and elsewhere. And so when the Lord had said to Ezechias, set thy house in order, for thou must die, hee turned his face to the wall, and prayed vnto the Lord, & said, n 1.517 I beseech thee Lord remember, how I haue walked before thee in truth, & with a perfect hart, & haue done that which is good in thy sight. And Paul 2. Tim. 4. with more confidence, when his dissolution was at hand, & he was ready to be offered vp, I haue fought a good fight, I haue finished my course, I haue kept

the faith, & henceforth there is layd vp for mee a crown of righteousnes, which the Lord the righteous iudge shall giue me in that day. Of Hilarion Hierom re∣porteth,

that when he was ready to die, he vsed these words, Egredere, quid ti∣mes, egredere anima mea, quid dubitas, sexaginta annis seruiuisti Christo, & mortē times? & in haec verba spiritum exhalauit.

But the answer herevnto is easy, for the diuines doe note, that there is ju∣stitia causae, facti, personae, a righteousnesse of some particular cause, of some parti∣cular fact, & of the person. Causae, & so Dauid oftentimes desired of God, to be judged in the differences, between him & his aduersaries that wronged him, ac∣cording to his righteousnes & innocency in those quarrels. Of fact, so it is sayd that Phinees stood vp & wrought vengance, & it was imputed to him for righ∣teousnesse, that is, he was iudged to haue done a righteous act in so doing. The righteousnes of the person is twofold, for there is a righteousnes that is sincere, true, & pure; & there is a righteousnes that is true, & sincere, but not pure. None of the S^s euer pleaded the former kind of righteousnes, nor desired to be iudged according to the same.

For Dauid in that respect declineth iudgment saying, Enter not into iudgment with thy seruant, for no flesh is righteous in thy sight;

& again, If thou Lord shouldest be extreame to marke what is done amisse, who

should be able to abide it? But in the latter sort, they do plead the truth, & sim∣plicity

of their harts, & the sincerity of the righteousnes that is found in them. And this for 2 reasons, first in that hereby they are assured, that they pertain to God, that hath thus begun to do good vnto them, & so confirme themselues, in the hope & expectation of that they desire, by the cōsideration of the good he hath already done vnto them. And besides also, for that they know this is the condition, wherewith all the promises of God made vnto them for their good are limitted; and therefore if they found not this they could expect nothing of God, & finding this they need not to doubt to obtaine any thing that is necessa∣ry for thē. And in this sort do Cardinall Contarenus, & Albertus Pighius men of no small esteeme in the Roman Church, cleere these obiections. So that it re∣maineth firme which I haue deliuered, that the righteousnes which is inherent in the iust, is impure & vnperfect, & that it is not safe to relie vpon it.

But because this is a matter of great consequence, I will demonstrate, that the same was taught before, at, & after Luthers time, by men of best place and qua∣lity, in the Church wherein our fathers liued. o 1.518 Bernard distinguisheth 4 kinds of righteousnesse. Our righteousnes he sayth is Recta, sed non pura: of which our Fathers sayd no lesse truly then humbly, All our righteousnesse is as the po∣luted ragges of a menstruous woman. For how can our righteousnesse be pure, wherein it cannot be but there should be sinne? The righteousnesse of the first man, was both right, and pure, but because it was not firme and constant,

it lost purity, and retained not so much as the rectitude it had. In the Angells there is righteousnesse right, pure, and firme, of an high and excellent nature, but much inferiour to that of God. Non enim innata est iis, sed à Deo collata, ut natura ipsa, quod ex se est, non modo iustitiae, sed etiam iniustitiae capax inveniatur. Numquid non ista est pravitas quaedam quam in angelis suis vera illa iustitia legitur invenisse? That is. The righteousnesse that is found in the Angels, is not in∣borne, but giuen to them, & bestowed on them: so that their nature, as of it

selfe, is capable not only of righteousnesse, but of vnrighteousnesse also. And is not this a kind of pravity and iniquity, which that true and perfect justice is said to haue found in his Angels? For he that was not ignorant of the justice of God, saith, no one liuing shall be ivstified in thy sight. Hee saith not, no man, but no one liuing, happily that thou maist know that he excepteth not the Angelicall spirits. For they liue, and so much more truely then men, as they are nearer to him in whom is the fountaine of life. Yet these are just, sed ex eo non coram eo, munere eius, non in eius comparatione, that is, from him, not before him, by his gift, but not in comparison with him.

For the clearing of this point Pet. Pomponatius noteth, that there is defectus in specie, defectus in genere, and defectus in latitudine entis, that is, Things doe fail & come short of perfection 3 wayes, for there are some things that want that per∣fectiō that pertaineth to things of their particular kind: some things that want not that perfectiō, & yet come short of that, which some other of the same gene∣rall kind haue: & somethings that haue all perfectiō, that any thing of their kind any way can haue, & yet come short of that which is found in the latitude & ex∣tent of perfectiō & being. Examples of the first, ignorance, error, blindnes, &c. in men. Of the second, the want of reason in bruit beasts, which are liuing crea∣tures as well as men, & yet come short of that perfection that is found in men; and likewise the sonnes of men come short of that perfection of intellectuall light, that is found in the Angels. Of the third in all the most perfect crea∣tures, which come short of that which is found in God, who is being it selfe: they are this, and not that, they haue being after not being, and would haue not being after being, if they were left to themselues, they are good, but not connaturally, they are no lesse capable of euill then of good, they are good, but mutably good, and so in respect of GOD, imperfectly good. In this sense Iob saith, God found folly in his servants, and vanitie in his Angels. This kind of defect or euill, is without all fault, sinne, or blame of things where∣in it is found: and is incident to the nature and condition of all created things, which are compounded of being and not being, perfection and want: and con∣sequently haue some thing of good, and some thing of euill. That defect that is in respect of perfections, that other things of the same generall kind haue, is likewise a naturall consequent of the different degrees of things, and no∣thing is blamed for being thus defectiue. So the righteousnesse that was in A∣dam, was inferiour to that of the Angels cōfirmed in grace, yet was it not sinful.

But the righteousnesse of the iust, commeth short of that which pertaineth to men. And though it be right, true, sincere, and not dissembled, yet hath it such defects, that it is impure. What may all our righteousnes bee before God? will it not bee found and esteemed as the Prophet saith, to bee like the ragges of a menstruous woman, and if it bee strictly examined, will not all our righteous∣nes be found to be vnrighteous and defectiue? What therefore will become of our sinnes, when our righteousnes is not able to answere for it selfe? Therefore crying out earnestly with the Prophet, Lord enter not into iudgment with thy seruant, let vs with al humility fly to mercy, which only is able to saue our souls. Bernardus super Cantica serm. 61. Vbi tuta firmaque infirmis securitas & requies, nisi in vulneribus saluatoris: Tanto illic securior habito, quanto ille potentior est ad salvandum; fremit mundus, premit corpus, diabolus in∣sidiatur,

nec cado: fundatus enim sum super firmam petram. Pec∣cavi peccatum grande, turbatur conscientia, sed non perturbabitur, quoniam vulnerum Domini recordabor. Ego vero fidenter quod ex me mihi deest, vsurpo mihi ex visceribus Domini, quoniam misericordia effluit, nec desunt foramina per quae effluat. p 1.519 Foderunt manus eius &c. & per has ri∣mas licet mihi sugere mel de petrâ, oleumque de saxo durissimo. Cogitabat cogitationes pacis, & ego nesciebam. Quis enim cognovit sensum Domini, aut quis consiliarius eius fuit? At clauis •…•…eserans, clavus penetrans factus est mihi, vt videam voluntatem Domini. Meum meritum, miseratio Domini: non planè sum meriti inops, quamdiu ille miserationum non fuerit. Nunquid iustitias meas cantabo? Domine memorabor iustitiae tuae solius: ip∣sa est enim & mea: nempe factus es tu iustitia mihi à Deo. Nunquid mihi verendum nè vna ambobus non sufficiat? non est pallium breve, quod (secun∣dum Prophetam) non possit operire duos. But because happily some ex∣ception may bee taken to Saint Bernard, as if hee had some singular o∣pinion, I will shew that all the glorious lights of the Church, ever be∣leeued as hee did, and as wee doe. Theodoret in Ps: 23. Quae existiman∣tur remunerationes, propter solam diuinam benignitatem hominibus praeben∣tur. Omnes enim hominum iustitiae, nihil sunt ad dona, quae à Deo nobis suppeditata sunt, nedum ad futura munera, quae omnem humanam cogitatio∣nem transcendunt. Chrysost: in Ps. 4. Etiamsi innumerabilia recte fecerimus à miserationibus & clementiâ audimur. Etiamsi ad ipsum virtutis fastigi∣um pervenerimus, servamur à misericordiâ. Et in Ps. 6. super illa verba, Mi∣serere mei Domine quoniam infirmus sum. Hâc voce omnes egemus, etiamsi innumerabilia rectè & ex virtute fecerimus, & vel ad summam perueneri∣mus iustitiam.

August: in Ps. 142. Omnes dereliquistis me dicit Dominus: quid vultis mecum in iudicium intrare, & vestras iustitias commemorare? Commemo∣rate iustitias vestras; ego novi facinora vestra. Nolo tecum habere causam, vt ego proponam iustitiam meam, tu convincas iniquitatem meam. Ne intres in iudicium cum servo tuo, Quare hoc? Quare times? Quoniam non iustifi∣cabitur coram te omnis viuens. Omnis itaque viuens iustificare forte potest se, coram se, non coram te. Quomodo coram se? sibi placens, tibi displicens, coram te autē non iustificabitur omnis vivens. Quantumlibet rectus mihi vi∣dear, producis tu de thesauro tuo regulā, coaptas me ad eā et pravus invenior.

Grego: moral: vlt. Si autem de his diuinitus districtè discutimur: quis inter ista remanet salutis locus, quando & mala nostra pura mala sunt; & bona quae nos habere credimus, pura bona esse nequaquam pos∣sunt? Beda in explicatione Ps. 24. Ne memineris delicta, sed potius me∣mento mei Domine, ut miserearis secundum misericordiam tuam, id est, te condignam, non secundum iram me condignam; tu dico ad quem pertinet, qui solus misereris, solus mederis, solus peccata dimittis; & hoc non facias prop∣ter merita mea, sed propter bonitatem, id est suavitatem tuam. Et in Ps. 31. Beati quorum remissae sunt iniquitates, &c. Instruit videlicet, vt nemo vel libertatem arbitrii vel merita sua sufficere sibi ad beatitudinem credat, sed solâ gratiâ Dei se salvari posse intelligat. Alcuinus in Ps. 50. Sordidare me potui, sed emundare nequeo, nisi tu Domine Iesu sancti sangui∣nis tui aspersione, mundum me facias. Et in Ps. 142. Ad meum cum respi∣cio

nihil aliud in me nisi peccatum invenio, tota liberatio mea tua est iustitia, item, Dei miseratione in nomine salvatoris, non nostris meritis vivificati sumus.

Radulphus Ardens, homil: super Evangelium Dominicae quartae Adven∣tus. Quid ergo dicemus fratres, nisi vel quantumcunque bonum fecerimus, semper nos indignos dicamus? Nec hoc dicamus solo ore, quasi mentiendo ex humilitate, sed mente credamus, ore confiteamur. Iuxta quod ipsa veritas admonet, dicens. Cum omnia feceritis quae praecepta sunt vobis, dicite, servi invtiles sumus, quod debuimus facere non fecimus. Et Homil: super Evang. Dominicae Septuagesimae. Sicut Deus est liber ad promittendum, ita est li∣ber ad reddendum, praesertim cum tam merita quàm praemia sint gratia sua. Nihil enim aliud quàm gratiam suam coronat in nobis Deus, qui si vellet in nobis agere districtè, non iustificaretur in conspectu eius omnis viuens. Vnde Apostolus qui plus omnibus laboravit, dicit: Existimo quod non sunt condig∣nae passiones huius temporis, &c.

Gerson de consolat: theolog: l. 4. pros. 1. Quis gloriabitur se mundum cor habere? &c: Quis non constitutus sub iudicijs Dei terribilis in consilijs su∣is super filios hominum trepidaverit? Hinc afflictus Iob, verebar omnia opera mea, &c. Et iterum, Si voluerit mecum contendere, non potero vnum re∣spondere pro mille; cui conformis est oratio prophetica, Non intres in iudici∣um cum seruo tuo Domine, quia non iustificabitur in conspectu tuo omnis vi∣vens; & rursus, Si iniquitates observaveris Domine, Domine quis sustine∣bit. Porro quid Esaias se cum caeteris involuens sibique vilescens protulerit legimus, Omnes iustitiae nostrae tanquam pannus menstruatae. Quis igitur iustitias suas velut gloriabundus ostentaverit Deo, plus quam pannum con∣fusionis suae mulier viro?

Gabriel Biel writing vpon the Canon of the Masse fol. 209. lect. 82. Alleadgeth and approveth this saying of Bernard serm. 5. de dedicatio∣ne ecclesiae; Nonnunquam de animâ meâ cogitans, videor mihi in eâ fateor velut duo contraria invenire; si ipsam prout in se est, & ex se intueor, nihil de eá verius sentire possum, quam ad nihilum esse redactam, cum sit onerata pec∣catis, obfusa tenebris, irretita illecebris, pruriens concupiscentiis, obnoxia pas∣sionibus, & impleta illusionibus, prona semper ad malum, & in vitium omne proclivis, &c: nimirum si ipsae quoque iusticiae nostrae omnes ad lumen veri∣tatis inspectae, velut pannus menstruatae inveniuntur, iniustitiae quales dein∣ceps reputabuntur? si lumen quod in nobis est tenebrae sunt, ipsae tenebrae qnantae erunt? Facile cuique est si sua plenius vniversa, & sine dissimulati∣one vestiget, & judicet sine acceptione personae, attestari per omnia apostolicae veritati, & libere proclamare, qui se putat aliquid esse cum nihil sit, ipse se seducit. Quid est homo quia magnificas eum, ait fidelis & devota confessio; aut quid apponis erga eum cor tuum? Quid? sine dubio vanitati similis * 1.520 factus est homo; ad nihilum redactus est homo; nihil est homo; Quomodo ta∣men penitus nihil est, quem magnificat Deus? Quomodo nihil erga quem appositum est cor divinum. Tanquam nihil reputatur homo in judicio veri∣tatis tuae, sed non sic in affectu pietatis tuae; nimirum vocas ea quae non sunt, sicut ea quae sunt: & non sunt, ergo quia vocas ea quae non sunt: & sunt, quia vocas: licet enim non sunt quantum apud se, apud te sunt vtique juxta Apo∣stolum; non ex operibus, sed ex vocante. Sic nimirum consolaris in tuâ pi∣tate,

quem in veritate tuâ humiliasti; vt magnificè dilatetur in tuis qui merito angustiatur in suis: siquidem vniversae viae domini misericor∣dia & veritas requirentibus testamentum tuum & testimonia tua Pupperus Gocchianus de libertate Christ. part. 3. c. 12, Christus sic operatur iustifica∣tionem in sanctis suis, quamdiu sunt in hâc vitâ, vt tamen semper in ijs sit a∣liquid adijciendum, quod petentibus benignè adijciat, & confitentibus miseri∣corditèr ignoscat. And the same Gocchianus hath many things against the merit of workes, as I will farther shew, when I come to speake of merite.

But to leaue particular men, it is evident that the Church of God taught so as we now doe, by those questions whereof I spake before, which were wont to be proposed to men that were ready to dye. Casper Vlenbergius saith, our Fathers thoroughout the Christian world, euen till our time, by those questi∣ons by them vsed, and the answeres which they taught men to make to them, lead as it were by the hand the simpler sort to the knowledge of Christ, and the attaining of eternall saluation. And because those questions and an∣sweres, containe and comprise in a briefe sort, the whole summe of the do∣ctrine of saluation, and the very marrow and kernell of Christianitie, as the same Vlenbergius rightly noteth, I will set them downe together, as they are founde in the booke intitled De arte benè moriendi.

Primo quaeratur sic, frater laetaris quod in fide Christi morieris? respondeat etiam. Fra∣ter poenitet te non tam benè vixisse sicut debuisses? respondeat etiam. Fra∣ter habes emendandi animum si spatium vivendi haberes? respondeat eti∣am. Frater credis te non posse nisi per mortem Christi salvari? respondeat etiam. Agis ei gratias ex toto corde de hoc? respondeat etiam. Age ergo dum est in te anima tua ei semper gratias, & in hâc ejus morte te to∣tum contege, in hâc solâ morte fiduciam tuam constitue, in nullâ aliâ re fi∣duciam habe, huic morti te totum committe, hâc solà te totum contege, totum immisce te in hâc morte totum confige, in hâc morte te totum in∣volve, & si Dominus Deus te voluerit judicare, dic, Domine, mortem Domini mei IESV CHRISTI objicio inter te & me, & judicium tuum, a∣liter tecum non contendo; si dixerit quod mereris damnationem, dic, mor∣tem Domini mei IESV CHRISTI objicio inter te & me, & mala merita mea, ipsumque dignissimae passionis meritum offero, pro merito quod ego habere debuissem, & heu non habeo; dicatur iterum. Domine, mortem Domini mei IESV CHRISTI pono inter me, & iram tu∣am: deinde dicat ter, In manus tuas Domine commendo spiritum meum.

And as this was the doctrine of the Church euen till our dayes, so in Lu∣thers time, and after, many that joyned not with him in the thorough reforma∣tion of the Church, yet concurred with him in this point.

Pope q 1.521 Adrian the sixt, Non sine magna temeritate, & damnabili elatione animi, quis inni∣titur propriis meritis, aut praeparationi per confessionem oris, cordis com∣punctionem, aut alias tanquam ex ijs dignus sit, venerabile Sacramentum Eu∣charistiae sumere; sunt enim merita nostra & praeparatio, velut baculus arun∣dineus, cui dum quis innixus fuerit confringitur, & perforat manum inniten∣tis, & quasi pannus menstruatae sunt omnes justitiae nostrae, ut habetur Esa. 64: Iugiter enim supra pannum bonae vitae, quem justitiae operibus reximus, stil∣lamus saniem diversorum criminum. Quae igitur ex ijs poterit esse fiducia ad Deum, qui neminem diligit nisi ex toto corde conversum? Recte igitur suasit salvator cum feceritis omnia quae praecepta sunt vobis, dicite servi inu∣tiles sumus, quae debuimus facere fecimus, Luc. 16. &c. Restat igitur ut ne∣mo confidat in se homine, quia sic recedit cor ejus à Deo. Hierem. 17. Ma∣ledictus qui confidit in homine, & ponit carnem brachium suum, &c: sed pro

dignâ praeparatione, diffidat de omni suâ industriâ, & cum Daniele non in su∣is justificationibus proferat preces suas, sed in miserationibus domini multis & magnis nimis Dan: 9. sic habitabit in adjutorio altissimi, & in protectione Dei coeli commorabitur: quia ad neminem Deus aspicit, nisiad pauperculum, id est, humilem spiritu, qui se non effert in cogitatione velut taurus, sed par∣ua de se sentiens, totum projicit in Deum: Es: vlt. Ad quem aspiciam nisi ad pauperculum?

The r 1.522 Enchiridion of Christian institution, published in the prouinciall coun∣cell of Colen, hath these words.

Scimus quandam esse plenam & absolutam ju∣sticiam, seu charitatem, quam in hac vitâ nemo assequitur, sed tantum in futurâ, quando videbimus facie ad faciē, & cognoscemus sicuticogniti sumus: sed alia minor est huic vitae competens, quâ ex fide viuimus & ambulamus. Haec etsi omnes motus terrenae cupiditatis, nondum omnino absorbeat atque consumat, consensum tamen prohibet ac extinguit, ac insuper facit, vt magis ac magis in bono proficere pergamus: quae etsi à perfectione iusticiae longè adhuc absit, ea tamen imperfectio iustificationem nostram non remoratur, nec accusationi seu damnationi legis subjacet, saltem in ijs qui sunt in Christo Iesu. Nam qui Chri∣sto (in quo lex quod accusaret, nihil inuenit) per fidem concorpores facti sunt, legis imperium beneficio Christi euaserunt: adeo vt, silex imperfectionem eo∣rum accusare pergat, respondere possint. Quid nobis tecum est lex? non tui sed alterius sumus. Tu quae es quae judicas seruos alienos? domino nostro stamus aut cadimus, huic sic visum est ex gratuitâ misericordiâ nos indignos assumere, & quicquid in nobis imperfectionis est cōdonare, quid ad te? Quid nobis alienū inuides beneficiū? Recepit nos ille in membra sua, scuto suae bonae voluntatis protexit nos, suâ justitiâ nos induit. Quāobrem si nos impetere pergas, eum tibi opponemus, cui per fidem inhaerescimus, in eo certè non habes quicquam, pro∣inde nec in nobis, qui de corpore ejus per gratuitam misericordiam facti su∣mus. s 1.523 Et ibid. paulo ante. Per fidem donum iustificationis tunc demum acci∣pis, cum perterrefactus ac concussus in poenitentiâ, rursus erigeris per fidem, credens tibi remissa esse peccata propter meritum Christi, qui in se credentibus remissionem peccatorum pollicitus est: & cum simul sentis te jam alio affectu quam prius rapi, hoc est, eo affectu quo peccata quae prius delectabant, jam ex animo odis, & ad faciendum bonum, carnis infirmitati fortiter repugnans, intus accenderis, tametsi is affectus nondum sit in bono perfectus & absolu∣tus. Hanc enim imperfectionem quam viribus tuis supplere non potes, sup∣plebis ex fide in Christum, credens justitiam Christi (cujus membrum fa∣ctus es) tuum imperfectum suppleturam, si tamen perpetuo pro viribus quas tibi dominus suppeditauerit, coneris eam quam accepisti gratiam promouere, & praeteritorum oblitus, non respiciens iterum retro, in anteriora te extende∣re annitaris.

Martinus t 1.524 Eisengreinius, alleageth & alloweth this of the councell of Colen, & sundry other passages of learned and renowned men, in the latter ages of the Church before our time, tending to the same purpose, as namely those things I formerly cited out of Anselme and Hortulus animae: to these u 1.525 hee addeth Thaulerus a famous preacher amongst the Dominicans at Colen more then two hundred yeares since, who prescribing how the Pastors should comfort the sicke, hath these words, Morti jam vicinus, prorsus nihil suis bonis operi∣bus

confidere debet, firmâ fiduciâ in meritum Christi saluatoris, & in abyssum maris ejus misericordiae, in cruenta vulnera ejus, cum omnibus suis peccatis se totum immergat: minutissima Christi vulnera omne peccatum mortalium ob∣nubilare ac tegere possunt.

And with him he joyneth Ludovicus Berus, who in his booke de mortis peri∣culo * 1.526 writeth thus.

The diuell is wont to tempt men that are ready to die, but let the sick man reject all those temptations, & let him inuocate God and say thus Auerte faciem tuam à peccatis meis, & respice in faciem Christi tui Iesu

saluatoris nostri. Tentator; Scelera tua superant arenam maris. Aegrotus. Copiosior est Domini misericordia. Tentator. Quomodo speras iustitiae praemium tu totus iniustus? Aegrotus. Iustitia mea Christus est. Tentator. Tu sceleribus opertus quomodo migrabis in requiem? Aegrotus. Cum la∣trone qui audiuit in cruce hodie eris mecum in Paradiso. Tentator. Vnde ista fiducia qui nihil boni feceris? Aegrotus. Quia bonum habeo Dominum, exorabilem iudicem, gratiosum advocatum, Christum Iesum omnipoten∣tem saluatorem. Tentator. Detraheris in tartara. Aegrotus. Caput meum in coelo est.

b 1.527 Hosius hath these wordes,

Non gloriamur de meritis nostris, non habe∣mus in illis fiduciam nostram collocatam, de hoc solo gloriamur, in hoc solo confidimus, quod membra sumus illius corporis tui, quod pro nobis passum, crucifixum, & mortuum, abundè pro peccatis totius mundi satisfecit. Quam∣obrem si merita requiris, ecce proferimus tibi merita corporis tui, quod cum de nostro sit, nostra sunt & illius merita: proferimus tibi meritum passionis tuae, ineritum crucis tuae, meritum mortis tuae: haec sunt merita nostra, quae tu clementissime Domine nobiscum pro immensâ benignitate tuâ communi∣care dignatus es: Secundum haec merita abs te iudicari postulamus, his meri∣tis freti coram tribunali tuo nos intrepidisistimus: nostra sunt quia nostri sunt capitis; nostra sunt quia nostri sunt corporis, á quo nos nefario schismate nunquam praecidimus: haec merita interponimus inter nos & iudicium tuum, aliter tecum iudicio contendere nolumus: de quo solenniter protestamur.

These wordes of Hosius, Eisengreinius saith, are worthy to bee written in letters of gold. * 1.528

d 1.529 Albertus Pighius writeth thus, In hominibus duplex considerari potest iustitia, sicut duplex invenitur regula cui conformari debeant: altera quâ iusti sunt coram hominibus, aut inter homines, nempe respondentes legibus quibus constat iustum inter homines; vt neminem afficientes iniuriâ, imo benevolentiâ, humilitatis, charitatisque officijs prosequentes proximos, om∣nibus in omni ordine, reddentes quod suum est. Altera est iustitia quâ iusti sunt coram Deo. Quod tamen trifariam ferè intelligere possumus. Vel quod nostra iustitia, cum divinâ conferatur. Sic non iustificatur in conspe∣ctu eius vlla creatura: vt cuius puritate, merito inquinantur omnia. Velin∣telligitur homo iustificari coram Deo, hoc est coram tribunali diuini iudicij, dum regulae divinae iustitiae, quâ parte ipsum respicit, exactè respondet. Re∣gula est lex: illā dupliciter intelligere possumus, vel in suâ illâ absolutâ perfe∣ctione; Vt cum praecipitur vt diligamus Deum, ex totâ animâ, totâ mente, totis viribus, e 1.530 Vel prout illa ipsa divinae iustitiae lex & regula nos respici∣ens, nostrae infirmitati aptata condescendit & convenit. Si hoc modo intel∣ligas, ex voluntatis humanae inconstantiâ, & inclinatione quâdam ad carnis sui hospitis amica & desideria, quae ab illâ lege diuinae iustitiae nos deflectere, & ad se attrahere, ac sollicitare nunquam cessat, adhuc invenire non est iu∣stum quenquam coram Deo inter filios Adae, sed verum reperietur etiam de hâc ipsâ quamvis imperfectâ iustitiâ, quod non iustificabitur in conspectu Dei omnis vivens; Siquidem iustitia haec, est ad suam regulam, etiam nostrae infirmitati attemperatam exacta correspondentia, & commensuratio in acti∣onibus nostris omnibus. Totum enim vniuersumque hominem denomi∣nans iustitia haec, secundum omnes eius partes, & omnes singularum parti∣um actiones, vt illi regulae suae correspondeat, & in officio suo constet necesse est, cuicunque haec iustitia convenit. Neque enim qui partem vnam aliquam legis seruauerit, praevaricator in caeteris, hic iustus est. Imo: Quicunque (inquit Iacobus) totam legem servauerit, offendit autem in vno, factus est omnium reus. Si dixerimus quoniam peccatum non habemus, &c. Christus omnes nos neminem quantumvis iustum excipiens docuit orare, Di•…•… nobis debita &c. Aversatur Deus omnem iniustitiam. Constat ergo quae de

nobis omnibus foret sententia, si Deus voluisset districto nobiscum judicio agere: si non misericordissimè nobis succurrisset in filio: & nostrâ justitiâ va∣cuos, ejus involuisset justitiâ. Quod verissime intellexit ille, qui ait: Si ini∣quitates observaveris Domine, Domine quis sustinebit? Ne intres in judi∣cium, &c. f 1.531 In Christi autem obedientiâ, quòd nostra collocatur justitia; in∣de est, quòd nobis illi incorporatis, ac si nostra esset accepta ea fertur: ita ut eâ ipsâ, etiam nos justi habeamur. Et velut ille quondam Iacob, cùm nativitate primogenitus non esset, sub habitu fratris occultatus, atque eius veste indutus, quae odorem optimum spirabat, seipsum insinuavit Patri, ut sub aliena persona benedictionē primogeniturae acciperet. Ita & nos, sub Christi primogeniti fra∣tris nostri preciosâ puritate delitescere, bono eius odore fragrare, eius perfe∣ctione, vitia nostra sepeliri, & obtegi, atque ita nos piissimo patri ingerere, ut iustitiae benedictionem, ab eodem assequamur necesse est. This of Pighius

is acknowledged by our adversaries, and they are wont to alleadge his ex∣ample, to shew how dangerous it is to reade the writings of Protestants, see∣ing a man so well grounded as he was; was drawne into this opinion by reading of Calvin.

The most reverend Canons of the Metropoliticall Church of Colein, in their antididagma opposed against the booke of reformation of Religion, intended by their Archbishop Hermannus, follow the same opinion that Pighius doeth,

their wordes are these. g 1.532 Iustificamur à Deo justitiâ duplici, tanquam per causas formales & essentiales. Quarum una & prior est consummata Christi justitia: non quidem quomodo extra nos in ipso est, sed sicut & quando ea∣dem nobis (dum tamen fide apprehenditur) ad iustitiam imputatur. Aliter verò iustificamur formaliter per iustitiam inhaerentem. Cu•…•… tamen inhae∣renti iustitiae (quod sit imperfecta) non innitimur principaliter: sed eâ tan∣quam interiori quodam experimento, certificamur, nobis (qui talem renova∣tionem spiritus nostri, in nobis sentimus & experimur) remissionem pecca∣torum factam, & Christi consummatam iustitiam nobis imputari, atque ita Christum per fidem in nobis habitare. Non ignoramus nos nulli alii merito praeterquam solius Christi, neque item ulli alii iustitiae, quàm iustitiae Christi, sine qua omninò nulla est iustitia, tanquam fundamento fidei nostrae inniti de∣bere. Quanquam oporteat nos interim, internae illius renovationis, quae fit per charitatem, quam spiritus sanctus in corda nostra diffundit, tanquam arra∣bonis, aut certè experientiae impetratae remissionis peccatorum, & imputatio∣nis justitiae Christi, rationem habere.

h 1.533 The booke commended to Charles the fifth, as opening a way for the com∣posing of the controversies in Religion then moued, and by him offered and re∣commended to the Diuines, appointed of both sides in the assembly at Ratisbon, for to conferre about the composing of the differences in Religion, clearely contayneth the same doctrine that the most reverend Canons of Colein deliue∣red before. For in the 5 Article of the same booke, the Authors and compo∣sers of it, amongst other good things communicated to vs in our Iustification, reckon the imputation of Christs righteousnesse, and say, that we are said to bee justified by faith, that is, accepted and reconciled vnto God, in that it appre∣hendeth mercy, and the righteousnesse that is imputed to vs for Christs sake and his merite, and not for the dignity and perfection of the righteousnesse which is communicated vnto vs in Christ; And farther they say, that the faith∣full soule doth not rely vpon that righteousnesse that is inherent in it, but vpon the onely righteousnesse of Christ giuen vnto vs, without which there neither is, nor can be any righteousnesse. And they adde hereunto, that they that tru∣ly repent of their sinnes, should most firmely, and with great assurance of faith, resolue, that they please God for Christs sake, who is a Mediatour betweene God and them, because he is a worker of propitiation, a High Priest, and an In∣tercessour for vs, whom the Father hath giuen vnto vs, and all good things to∣gether

with him. And therefore though they say not, as the Canons of Colen, that Christs righteousnesse is the formall cause of our justification: yet i 1.534 Vega thinketh they followed the same opinion, because besides inherent righteous∣nesse, they affirme that another righteousnes, namely that of Christ, is commu∣nicated to vs, by which especially wee are made righteous, and vppon which only we must rely.

The Interim published by Charles the 5, with the assent of the imperiall states, deliuereth the same touching iustification, that the former authors haue done. And the diuines of both sides in the conference at Ratisbon, agreed in the same explication of the article of iustification that wee haue hetherto deliuered.

A great contention there is and hath beene, whether the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to vs, bee the formall cause of our justification, and whe∣ther we be formally justified by his imputed righteousnesse or not. But k 1.535 An∣draeas Vega supposeth, that it is a meere logomachie, and verball contention; which his conjecture I thinke will be found more then probable. For as I haue already shewed, in the justification of a sinner three things are implyed. 1 To be free from dislike, disfauour, and punishment, as if he had neuer offen∣ded. Secondly, to be respected, fauoured, and indeared vnto God, in such sort as righteous men are wont to be, as if he had done all righteousnes. And thirdly To haue the grant of the gift of righteousnesse, to keepe from euill, and incline him to good in the time to come. All these denominations are respectiue, and a man may be so denominated from something without. For one man is re∣conciled to another, in that hee no longer intendeth euill vnto him: and one man is deare vnto another, and we are deare vnto God formally, by that loue where∣by we are beloued of him. And because that which giueth satisfaction to God, and that which maketh him well pleased towards vs, is that for which formal∣ly, or in respect whereof, God willeth our good & not euill; by both these we may be sayd though in a different sort, to be formally iustified. Wherefore ha∣uing sufficiently cleared the point of controuersie, touching the first justifying, and reconciling of a sinner to God, and made it appeare, that the Church euer beleeued as we now do; it remaineth that we speake of the second justification.

The second justification consisteth, in the * 1.536 remission of such sinnes, as the ju∣stified man dayly through infirmity falleth into, and the progresse and going on in well doing, and the dayly preuailing against sinne, whereby the kingdome of sinne is weakened, and the kingdome of grace and righteousnesse is confirmed, and more strongly established in us. Touching the second justification, there is no difference between vs & them that so deliuered the doctrine of the first justi∣fication, as I haue before expressed, but between the Romanists & vs, there are sūdry things cōtrouerted. For 1 ^t many of thē, deny the veniall sins into which the regenerate do fal, to be properly sins, & therefore think not aright of the re∣missiō of thē. 2^• They imagine, that sūdry externall obseruatiōs ex opere oper•…•…to giue grace, & remit those sins, whereas in truth, & in the opiniō of others, they auaile no otherwise, then they stirre vp deuotion, and raise in vs good motions and desires, to purge out the remaines of sinne, and to seeke the remission of it. Thirdly, they make the good workes of men justified, to deserue increase of grace, & the reward of eternall life, of condignity. But I will shew in that which followeth, that the doctrine of merit was neuer admitted in the Church, nei∣ther before, nor after Luthers time. In this justification, men are justified meere∣ly by faith as in the first, so farre forth as it importeth remission of sins: but in that it importeth an increase, confirmation, and growth in that good that is be∣gun in us: our working of vertue and good indeauours causing the same, may be sayd to justify, that is, to make vs more iust inherētly then before, & more strōg∣ly inclined to good; in which sense S. Iohn saith, Qui iustus est iustificetur adhuc.

The third kind of justification, which is sayd to bee the restoring of men once justified, and afterwards fallen from grace, to the state of grace againe,

is meerely imaginary. For they that are called according to purpose and soe justified, do neuer totally nor finally fall from God.

The sins which men run into, I haue elsewhere shewed to be of 2 sorts: Inha∣biting only, or Raigning: the former in the judgment of our aduersaries them∣selues, do stand with grace, & the state of iustification. Sins regnant are (as The∣odoret writing vpon the sixt to the Romans, & after him, others do rightly note) of 2 sorts: for either they raigne as a tyrant, or as a king: a king reigneth with the loue & liking of his subjects, who wish nothing more then to liue vnder him, & think there is no happines but in his slauery: a tyrant with dislike. They that are justified & called acording to purpose, neuer haue sin raigning in them as a king, but somtimes as a tyrant they haue. * 1.537 For though Dauid & Peter were strangely transported, with the violēt passions of feare & lust, yet who will euer think, that these lost all their former good affections towards God, & thought it their happines to be subject to his enemies? Nay it is cleerly deliuered concer∣ning Peter, by Theophylact, and sundry others, that though the leaues were sha∣ken off, yet the roote remained vnmarred.

Iustification likewise, as I haue shewed in the same place, importeth 2 things, An interest, right, & title to the kingdome of heauen, & a claime to it by vertue & force of the same right & title: the one of these may cease & be suspended, when the other remaineth. If a man that hath much due vnto him vpon good as∣surances, do some act for which he is excommunicated, or outlawed, he looseth not the title & right he had to the things due vnto him vpō those assurāces, but if the same things be detained, all prosecution of his right is suspēded, & all actuall claime ceaseth, during the time he continueth in that estate. So in like manner, if a man called according to purpose & justified, who can neuer finally fall from God, fall into grieuous sin, & such as is in some sort regnant, as Dauid did, hee looseth not the right & title hee formerly had: but the actuall claime to that whereto he hath title is suspended. So that he falleth not totally from justifica∣tion, but so only as for the present to haue no actuall claime to any thing by ver∣tue o•…•… it. The remission of his originall sin, the right to heauen obtained in bap∣tisme, the force and vertue of repentance of former sins, and the right to the re∣wards of actions of vertue formerly done, remaine still: neither needeth he new∣ly to seeke remission of sins formerly remitted, but of this only, & the remissi∣on of the other will be reuiued again, & he may make claime to all those things he had formerly right vnto, by vertue of the former right. This is cleerely deli∣uered by Alexander of Ales p. 4. q. 12. memb. 4. art. 6. l 1.538 Scotus, m 1.539 Durandus; & the rest of the Schoole-men. So that the elect & chosē of God once justified, neuer falling totally from justification, are neuer to be newly justified againe: but the dayly & lighter sins they run into, stand with the right they haue to the fauours of God, & eternall happines, & the actuall claime to the same by that right. The more grieuous depriue thē of the claime only, & not of the right; & when they are justified & acquitted from these by particular repentance, they are restored to their former claime only, hauing neuer lost their right; so that they cannot properly be sayd to be newly justified, but only to be justified from such parti∣cular sins, as they newly run into.

Hauing spoken of justification and the nature of it, as it is considered in it selfe; it remaineth that wee come to speake of the things required in men, for the disposing and fitting of them, that they may be capable of this grace. There were amongst the Schoole-men, as n 1.540 Stapleton telleth vs, and after them in the beginning of these controuersies in religion, who extenuating the cor∣ruption of nature, taught vnaduisedly, that men without and before the motions of grace, may doe certaine morall good workes, in such sort, as thereby to fitte themselues, for the receipt of the grace of justification, and to merit it ex congruo. Who to expresse this their false conceipt, were wont to say, facienti quod in se est, Deum non denegare gratiam,

that is, that God will not faile to giue grace, to such as doe the vttermost that lyeth in them. But the same Stapleton telleth vs, that the more sound and judicious euer taught, that there is no power nor will in man to dispose and fit himselfe, for the receipt of this grace, vnlesse hee bee moued by preventing grace, stirring, inciting, and inclining him to turne to God; and that the merite of congruence, hath beene long since hissed out of all Schooles.

Touching these preparations wrought in men by preventing grace. First it is agreed betweene those of the Church of Rome, and those of the reformed Religion, that faith to beleeue in generall the truth of things revealed and con∣tained in Scripture, is necessarie in the first place, and before all other things. Secondly, that in particular there must be a viewing of the things there found; that the consideration of mans originall state there described, the fall, corrupti∣on of nature, and manifold sinfull euils into which each man is plunged, toge∣ther with the apprehension of Gods displeasure against the same, is necessarily required. Thirdly, a feare & sorrow, growing out of the discerning of this vn∣happy condition wherein we are. Fourthly, an enquirie by what meanes wee may escape out of these euils. Fiftly, faith to beleeue, that God most inclinable to releeue vs, rather then man should vtterly perish, sent his owne Sonne into the world, to suffer the punishment of sin, to satisfie his justice, to bring grace, & dissolue the workes of the diuell; that so all that in sense of former euils, flye to him for mercy and deliuerance, may escape & be saued. Sixtly, hauing found so happy meanes of escape, a flying vnto God, in earnest desire to bee re∣ceiued to mercy for Christs sake, to be freed from the guilt of sinne, to bee re∣conciled to God, and to haue grace to decline euill, and doe good in the time to come. All these things in the judgement of the Diuines of both sides, are neces∣sarily required, in them that are to be justified.

The most reverend Canons of the Metropoliticall Church of Colen, in the booke called Antididagma Coloniense, make the things required in them, on whom the benefite of justification is bestowed, to be of two sorts. For there are some that onely dispose & prepare vs, other by which we receiue the same. Of the former sort is the generall perswasion of faith, touching the trueth of things in Scripture; the particular consideration of things concerning the knowledge of God, and our selues; sorrow, feare, dislike of our present estate, desire to be deliuered out of it, to be reconciled to God, & to haue grace to de∣cline euill and doe good. Of the latter sort is the perswasion of faith, whereby we assure our selues without doubting, that God will not impute our sins vnto vs, that thus penitently turne vnto him, but that the course of his mercies now and euer, shall be turned towards vs for his Sonne Christs sake,

This is that speciall faith, they of the reformed Religion speake of, and the Romanists seeme so much to dislike: whereas yet the best and most judicious amongst them, euer did, and still doe admit the same. Andraeas Vega l. 9. c. 7. saith, that there hath beene a great controversie about this matter, not onely betweene Catholiques, and such as they esteeme heretickes, but euen amongst the most learned Catholiques of this age, at Rome, at Trent, at Ratisbone, and in sundry other places: many affirming that a man without speciall revelation, may vndoubtedly beleeue, and certainely assure himselfe, that he is in grace, and hath obtayned remission of all his sinnes. This perswasion rising as a conclusion out of, * 1.541 two propositions, the one of faith, the other euident vnto vs in our owne experience, is a perswasion of faith; because whensoeuer a conclusion is consequent vpon two propositions, the one of faith, the other euident in the light of reason and experience, it is to bee beleeued by faith, or as Iohn Bacon, certitudine consequente fidem. This opinion, as a 1.542 Vega tel∣leth vs, b 1.543 Claudius Belliiocensis followed, in his Commentaries vpon Ti∣mothy: And the most reverend Canons of the Metropoliticall Church of Colen, together with the Authors of the Enchiridion of Christian Religion, published

in the Provinciall Councell of Colen vnder Hermannus, so much esteemed (as c 1.544 Cassander telleth vs) in Italy, & France; The Authors of the booke offered by Charles the 5, to the Diuines of both sides; And as some say, Hieron. Angestus.

But for the better clearing of this point, First I will produce the testimo∣nies of such as liued before Luthers time. Secondly, I will make it appeare, that the same trueth was defended after Luthers time, till the Councell & after. Origen writing vpon those wordes, Rom. 8.

Ipse spiritus testimonium perhi∣bet spiritui nostro &c: writeth thus, Ipse spiritus adoptionis per quem in filiū quis adoptatur, reddit testimonium & confirmat spiritum nostrum, quod su∣mus filij Dei, posteaquam à spiritu seruitutis in adoptionis spiritum veneri∣mus, cum jam nihil inest timoris, id est, nihil propter poenam gerimus, sed propter amorem patris cuncta perficimus.

Cyprianus ad Demetrianum hath these wordes, Viget apud nos spei robur & firmitas fidei, & inter ipsas saeculi labentis ruinas erecta mens est, & immo∣bilis virtus, & de Deo suo semper anima secura. De coena Domini; An ma se sa∣natam et sanctificatam agnoscens, fletibus se abluit, & lachrymis se baptizat. De mortalitate; Quis hic anxietatis et sollicitudinis locus est? Quis inter haec trepidus & maestus est, nisi cui spes & fides deest? Ejus enim est mortem timere, qui ad Christum nolit ire: eius est ad Christum nolle ire, qui se non cre∣dat cum Christo incipere regnare. Scriptum est enim, justum fide vivere, si ju∣stus es & fide vivis, si verè in Deum credis, cur non cum Christo futurus, et de Domini pollicitatione securus, quod ad Christum voceris amplecteris? And a∣gaine in the same place; Deus de hoc mundo recedenti tibi immortalitatem at{que} aeternitatem pollicetur, & tu dubitas? Hoc est Deum omnino non nosse; hoc est Christum credentium Dominum et magistrum, peccato incredulitatis offende∣re; hoc est in ecclesiâ constitutum, fidem in domo fidei non habere.

Ambrose serm. 5. writeth thus; Quisquis illi fermento Christi adhaerescit, efficitur & ipse fermentum, tam sibi vtilis, quam idoneus vniuersis, & de suâ certus salute, & de aliorum acquisitione securus.

And S. Chrysostome writing vpon those wordes Rom. 8. Ipse spiritus &c. affirmeth, that from the testimony of the spirit we haue such certainety, as leaueth no place for doubting.

Augustine serm. 28. de verbis Domini; O homo faciem tuam non audebas ad coelum attollere, oculos tuos in terram dirigebas, et subito accepisti gratiam Christi. Omnia tibi peccata dimissa sunt. Ex malo seruo factus es bonus filius. Ideo praesume non de operatione tuâ sed de Christi gratiâ. Non ergo hic arro∣gantia est sed fides: praedicare quod acceperis non est superbia sed devotio. Er∣go attolle oculos ad patrē, qui te per lauachrum genuit, ad patrē qui per filium te redemit, & dic, Pater noster &c. And in his 22 tract, vpon Iohn; 'Credo pro∣mittenti, saluator loquitur, veritas pollicetur, ipse dixit mihi, Qui audit verba mea, & credit ei qui misit me, habet vitam aeternam, et transitum facit de morte in vitam, & in judiciū non veniet: ego audiui verba Domini mei, credidi. I am infidelis cum essem, factus sum fidelis, sicut ipse monuit, transij à morte ad vi∣tam, ad judicium non venio, non praesumptione meâ, sed ipsius promissione. In Ps. 149. Est quidam modus in conscientiâ gloriandi, vt noueris fidem tuam esse sinceram, noveris esse spem tuam certā, noveris charitatem tuam esse sine simu∣latione. Ser. 6. de verbis Apostoli; Ex ipsâ dilectione justitiae, integrâ fide, ca∣tholicâ fide, spiritū Dei nobis inesse cognoscimus. Trac. 75. in Ioan. In illo die, inquit, vos cognoscetis, quia ego in patre, & vos in me, & ego in vobis. In quo die; nisi de quo ait, & vos viuetis? Tunc enim erit, vt possimus videre quod cre∣dimus, nam & nunc est in nobis, & nos in illo: sed hoc nunc credimus, tunc etiā cognoscemus, quamvis & nunc credendo nouerimus, sed tunc contemplando noscemus. De trinitate li. 13. c. 1. Non sic videtur fides in corde in quo est, ab co cuius est, sed eam tenet certissima scientia, clamatque conscientia. Cum itaque propterea credere jubeamur, quia id quod credere jubemur vi∣dere non possumus, ipsam tamen fidem quando inest in nobis videmus in no∣bis: quia et rerum absentium praesens est fides, & rerum quae foris sunt

intus est fides, & rerum quae non videntur, videtur fides. Lib. 8. cap. 8. Qui diligit fratrem, magis nou it dilectionem quâ diligit quam fratrem quem dili∣git. Tractat: 5. in epist. Ioannis; nemo interroget hominem: redeat vnusquis{que} ad cor suum, si ibi inuenerit charitatem fraternam, securus sit quia transijt a morte ad vitam. Tractat: in Psal. 85. Dicat vnusquis{que} fidelium, Sanctus sum. Non est ista superbia elati, sed confessio non ingrati. De bono perseuerantiae cap: 2. Sicut ergo sanctus cum Deum rogat vt sanctus sit, id vtique rogat•…•…t sanctus esse permaneat; ita vtique & castus, cum rogat vt castus sit: conti∣nens, vt continens sit: justus, vt justus sit: pius, vt pius sit: & caetera quae contra Pelagianos dona Dei esse defendimus, hoc sine dubio petunt, vt in eis perseuerent bonis, quae se accepisse nouerunt.

Leo in his 8. sermon on the Epiphanie sayth; Ipsam matrem virtutum om∣nium charitatem, in secretis suae mentis inquirat: & si in eâ dilectionem Dei & proximi toto corde intentè repererit, ita vt etiam inimicis suis eadem velit tri∣bui, quae sibi optat impendi, quisquis hujusmodi est, Deum & rectorem & habi∣tatorem sui esse non dubitet. Gregory moral. l. 9: c: 17. vpon these words of Iob, Etiamsi simplex fuero hoc ipsum ignorabit anima mea: writeth thus; Ple∣rum{que} si scimus bona quae agimus, ad elationem ducimur: si nescimus minimè seruamus. Quis enim aut de virtutis suae conscientiâ non quantulumcun{que} su∣perbiat? Aut quis rursum bonum in se custodiat quod ignorat? Sed contra v∣tra{que} quid superest, nisi vt recta quae agimus, sciendo nesciamus: vt haec & re∣cta aestimemus & minima: quatenus & ad custodiam sensificet animum scientia rectitudinis, & in tumorem non eleuet aestimatio minorationis. And cap. 27. he sayth: Sciendum vero est, quod viri sancti ita incerti sunt vt confidant, at{que} ita confidunt, vt tamen ex securitate non torpeant.

Anselme, writing vpon the 8. chapter of the epistle to the Romans sayth: Ipse spiritus diuinus testimonium reddit spiritui nostro, id est, recognoscere & intelligere facit spiritum nostrum, quia sumus filij Dei. Et per hoc quod ipse spiritus sanctus charitatem nobis infundit, quae nos facit imitatores esse diuinae bonitatis, vt diligamus inimicos nostros, & benefaciamus his qui ode∣runt nos, sicut pa•…•…er coelestis solem suum oriri facit, super bonos & malos, at∣que pluit super justos & iniustos, euidenti testimonio declarat menti nostrae, nos esse filios Dei, cuius bonitatem pro modulo nostro sequimur. In 2. Cor. 13. Qui fidei sensum in corde habet, hic scit Christum Iesum in se esse, & uos ita scitis eum in uobis esse, nisi fortè reprobi estis, hoc est enim reprobum esse, nescire fidem professionis suae. Et vos cognoscitis, quia per sen∣sum fidei, & per affectum dilectionis, ac strenuitatem rectae actionis, est Chri∣stus in vobis nisi forte reprobi estis, id est, ab eo quod prius caepistis, retro con∣uersi, & a Deo rejecti.

Bernardus epist. 107.

Iustus autem quis est, nisi qui amanti se Deo, vi∣cem rependitamoris? Quod non fit nisi revelante spiritu per fidem homini aeternum Dei propositum super suâ salute futurâ. Quae sanè reuelationon est aliud quam infusio gratiae spiritualis: per quam dum facta carnis mortificantur, homo ad regnum praeparatur quod caro et sanguis non possident, simul acci∣piens in vno spiritu et vnde se praesumat amatum, et vnde redamet nè gratis amatus sit. In Cantica serm. 69. Prorsus habet ecclesia Dei spirituales suos, qui non modo fideliter, sed & fiducialiter agant in eo, cum Deo qua∣si cum amico loquentes, testimonium illis perhibente conscientiâ gloriae ejus. Da mihi animam nihil amantem praeter Deum, et quod propter Deum aman∣dum est: cui viuere Christus non tantum sit, sed & diu jam fuerit: cui stu∣dij et otij sit prouidere Deum in conspectu suo semper: cui sollicitè ambulare cum Domino Deo suo, non dico magna, sed vna voluntas sit, & facultas non desit: da mihi inquam talem animam, & ego non nego dignam sponsi curâ, ma∣jestatis respectu, dominantis fauore, sollicitudine gubernantis: & si voluerit gloriari non erit insipiens, tantum vt qui gloriatur in domino glorietur.

And

afterwards, Ex propriis quae sunt penes Deum, agnoscit nec dubitat se amari quae amat. And a little afterwards. Vides quomodo non solum de amore suo certum te reddat, si quidem tu ames illum: sed etiam de sollicitudine sua quam pro te gerit, si te senserit sollicitum sui. In Octavâ Paschae, Serm. 2. Sanè novum supervenisse spiritum, certissimè conversatio nova te∣statur.

Idem Epist. 107. Ponamus hominem in seculo seculi adhuc & suae carnis amore retentum: & cum terrestris hominis imaginem portet, incubantem ter∣renis, nil de coelestibus cogitantem: quis hunc non videat horrendis circum∣susum tenebris, nisi qui in eâdem mortis umbra sedet: quippe cui nullum ad∣huc suae salutis signum eluxerit, cui necdum in aliquo interna testetur inspi∣ratio an boni de se quippiam aeterna teneat praedestinatio? At verò si superna eum miseratio dignantèr quandoque respexerit, immiseritque spiritum com∣punctionis, quatenus ingemiscat & resipiscat, mutet vitam, domet carnem, a∣met proximum, clamet ad Deum, proponat{que} de caetero vivere Deo, non seculo: ex quâ deinde superni luminis gratuitâ visitatione, & subitâ mutatione dex∣terae excelsi, agnoscat se merito quidem non iam irae sed gratiae filium, quippe qui paternum erga se divinae bonitatis experitur affectum, quod se uti{que} hactenus in tantum latuerat, vt non solum nesciret vtrumnam dignus foret amore, an odio, verumetiam odium magis & non amorem propria conversatio testaretur, erant enim tenebrae adhuc super faciem abyssi: nonne is tibi videtur quasi de abysso profundissimâ, & tenebrosissimâ horrendae ignorantiae, in ali∣am quandam quoque trahi abyssum, èregione amoenam & lucidam claritatis aeternae? & tunc demum quasi dividit Deus lucem à tenebris, cùm peccator so∣le illucescente iustitiae, abiectis operibus tenebrarum induitur arma lucis: & is quem prior vita ac propria conscientia tanquam reverâ filium gehennae depu∣taverat ardoribus sempiternis, ad tantam visitantis se orientis ex alto digna∣tionem respirans, gloriari etiam incipit, praeter spem in spe gloriae filiorum Dei, quam iam nimirum è vicino revelatâ facie exultans novo in lumine spe∣culatur, & dicit: Signatum est super nos lumen vultus tui Domine: dedisti lae∣titiam in corde meo. O Domine, quid est homo quia innotuisti ei: aut filius ho∣minis quia reput as eum? iam se o bone Pater, vermis vilissimus, & odio dig∣nissimus sempiterno, tamen confidit amari, quoniam se sentit amare: imo quia se amari praesentit, non redamare confunditur. Iam apparet in lumine tuo ô inaccessibilis lux, quid boni penes te, etiam cùm malus esset, miserum ma∣neret homunculum. Amat proinde non immerito, quia amatus est sine me∣rito. Amat sine fine, quia sine principio se cognoscit amatum. Prodit in lucem ad miseri consolationem, magnum consilium quod ab aeterno latue∣rat in sinu Aeternitatis: quod nolit videlicet Deus mortem peccatoris, sed magis vt convertatur & vivat. Habes homo huius arcani indicem spiritum iustificantem: eoque ipso testificantem spiritui tuo quod filius Dei & ipse sis. Agnosce consilium Dei in iustificatione tui. Confitere & dic: Consilium meum iustificationes tuae. Praesens namque iustifica∣tio tui, & divini est consilii revelatio, & quaedam adfuturam gloriam prae∣paratio.

Idem de quatuor modis orandi. Surge, tolle lectum tuum, &c. Et tu ergo si iam surgis desiderio supernorum, si grabatum tollis, corpus scili∣cet a terrenis elevans voluptatibus, vt iam non feratur anima à concupis∣centiis

eius, sed magis ipsa vt dignum est, regat illud, & ferat quo non vult, si demum ambulas quae retro sunt obliviscens, & ad ea quae ante sunt, te ex∣tendens desiderio, & proposito proficiendi, curatum te esse non dubites. Item serm. 1. in annunciatione beatae Mariae. Si credis peccata tua non posse deleri nisi ab eo cui soli peccasti, & in quem peccatum non cadit, bene facis: sed adde adhuc, vt & hoc credas, quia per ipsum tibi peccata donantur. Hoc est testi∣moniū quod perhibet in corde nostro spiritus sanctus, dicens: Dimissa sunt tibi peccata tua. Sic enim arbitratur Apostolus, gratis iustificari hominem per fidē.

Gulielmus Altisiodorensis in sent. lib. 3. tract. 6. Quidam dicunt, quod quidam sciunt se non habere charitatem, scilicet qui sunt in actu vel proposito peccandi. Alij dubitant se habere charitatem cum habent aequè fortes ra∣tiones ad vtramque partem contradictionis. Alij putant se habere charita∣tem. Alij sciunt se habere charitatem, scilicet qui gustauerunt dulcedinem Dei, & in quibus ferè extinctus est fomes, vt Maria Magdalena et Aegyp∣tiaca post multos fletus. And a litle after distinguishing 2 kinds of know∣ledge properly so named, he saith, by the one we know we are in grace and not by the other.

The booke called d 1.545 regimen animarum agreeth with Altisiodorensis, making 5 sorts; some that knowe they haue not; some that doubt; some that thinke they haue; quidam qui experiuntur se habere charitatem, vt illi qui gustant diuinam dulcedinem, in quibus fomes ferè extinctus est, & qui semper vel bona faciunt vel affectant; quidam certi sunt se habere cha∣ritatem vt sunt illi quibus Deus reuelauit secreta coelestia, sic fuit Paulus.

e 1.546 Pantheologia likewise saith,

Quidam dicunt, quod aliqui sciunt se esse in gratia experimentaliter, sicut illi qui sentiunt dulcedinem divinae bonitatis, & in oratione gustant quam suav is est Dominus. Alios scire se esse in gratia Dei supernaturaliter sicut sunt illi qui ita dotati sunt à Deo & perfecti quod jam non habent rebellionem fomitis, sed habent plenam pacem spiritus, & senti∣unt se elevatos in contemplatione divina sicut fuerunt Paulus, & Maria Magdalena.

Alexander of Ales 3. part. 9. 61. memb. 7. art. 3. First reckoneth the opini∣on of 5 sorts of men formerly mentioned, to wit, of men knowing they are not in grace; of men doubting; of men thinking they are; of men experimentally knowing it, as doe they, qui sentiunt dulcedinem divinae bonitatis in oratione, & gustant quam suavis est Dominus. And lastly of men who haue knowledge that they are in grace; qui ita sunt dicati Deo & perfecti, quod iam non habent rebellionem fomitis, sed habent plenam pacem spiritus, & sentiunt concupiscentias carnis in se consopitas, & sentiunt se omninò elevatos in divinam contemplationem, sicut fuit Beata Magdalena, & Paulus qui ait ad Rom 8. Quis separabit &c. And then he distinguisheth contemplatiue and affectiue knowledge, that some make a knowledge by science, and a knowledge by experiment, the one an in∣fallible the other a fallible medium, and thinketh that wee may knowe by cer∣taine experiments that wee are in grace; which experiments are, charitas apud vim rationalem, pax apud irascibilem, laetitia apud concupiscibilem. That a man may haue certaine knowledge that hee is in grace, he proveth out of Revel. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. To him that overcommeth I will giue the hidden Manna, &c. which no man kno∣eth but hee that reeciueth it, therefore hee that receiueth it doth know it; but that hidden Manna &c: is not vnderstood onely, of the injoying of diuiine sweetnes in glory in heauen, but by grace in this world; but he that receiueth it knoweth it, therefore he that receiueth the diuine sweetnes by grace know∣eth it, therefore hee knoweth hee hath grace, by it, as by a certaine experi∣ment. Besides, the taste that is well affected, cannot but discerne the sweet∣nes

that is put vnto it, therefore if the soule bee rightly affected, it cannot but discerne the diuine sweetnes put to it; but the discerning of diuine sweetnes is by grace, therefore a soule rightly affected, cannot but know that it hath grace, therefore grace is experimentally knowen, as by the sense of diuine sweetnes. 2. Cor. vlt. Doe yee not know your selues that Christ Iesus is in you except you bee reprobates? This the Apostle speaketh to the Corinthians, therefore there is some man who if he bee not a reprobate, knoweth that Christ is in him, and if hee know this, he kuoweth hee hath grace, because Christ is not in vs but by grace; whence it followeth, that hee knoweth experimentally that hee hath grace.

Iohn Bachon, lib. 3. dist. 30. q. 1. saith expressely that men may be certaine they are in grace by a certainety following faith, or flowing out of faith. In our age Cardinall Caietan, Commentar: in Ioan. 14. Dat Deus etiam hoc, vt sciamus quae à Deo nobis donata sunt, &c. Cuilibet diligenti ipsum promittit, non quod se manifestabit, sed quod se insinuabit, dictio enim graeca significat velut tacitè & clam indicare, quoniam Iesus cuilibet diligenti se, indicat sei psum intus, internâ illustratione & inspiratione, diversimodè, prout electi experi∣untur, accipientes manna absconditum, quod nemo novit nisi qui accepit. And writing vpon those wordes, 1. Io: 2: In hoc scimus quontam cogno∣vi•…•…us eum, he sayth. Intendit Iohannes ad litteram monstrare, signum in∣fallibile internae lucis divinae in nobis esse, si mandata eius servauerimus. Rof∣fensis saith, Sacramenta ideo potissimum sunt instituta, vt per vsum illorum citra vllam dubitationem confidamus, gratiam nos esse consecutos. de sacr. eu∣charist. lib. 1. cap. 6.

a 1.547 The Authours of the booke offered by Charles the fift to the Diuines ap∣poynted for the conference at Ratisbon, in the fift article plainely affirme, O∣portere vt verè paenitentes fide certissimâ statuant, se propter mediatorem Christum Deo placere. The same was agreed vnto by the Divines of both sides. Cardi∣nall Contarenus president of the meeting and conference approved it; and as the same Vega sayth, many Catholiques in the Councell at Trent; before the publishing of the decree, followed the same opinion as most probable, and sought to confirme it by many arguments. b 1.548 And hee reporteth, that amongst others there was one learned man, that professed, hee held the denying of the certainety of grace, to bee a worse errour then that imputed to Luther, for whereas the Lutherans attribute too much to faith, this opinion derogateth from fayth, the sacraments, & the merits & workes of vertue.

Yet in the end there was a * 1.549 decree passed for the vncertainety of grace, but in such sort, that who would held their former opinions still, and made such constructions of the decree as they pleased: as it appeareth by Ambrosius Ca∣tharinus, in his apology against Dominicus à Soto, wherein he defendeth an ab∣solute certainety of grace, and a certainety of fayth, and yet will not be thought to be touched, by the censure of the councell.

Martinus Eisingreinius, a man of no small account, hath a whole booke in explication and defence of this one decree of the councell, and telleth vs, the councell neuer meant simply to condemne the certainety of grace, but onely that kinde of certainety that heretickes imagine, which is without all examina∣tion of themselues, their estate, the trueth of their profession, their dislike of sinnefull evills, and desire of reconciliation, and grace to decline euill and to doe good, to perswade themselues they are justified. And whereas most men, conceiue the meaning of the councell to bee, that hee is accursed, that thinketh it necessary for the attayning of remission of sinnes, that every man should perswade himselfe, without any doubting in respect of his owne indis∣position, that his sinnes are remitted, & that thus to perswade himselfe pro∣cureth remission: hee maketh the meaning of it to be, that whosoeuer without

consideration of his estate whether hee be rightly disposed or otherwise, pre∣sumeth of Gods grace & fauour, is worthily anathematized, but if a man ha∣uing examined himselfe, finde a disposition, in dislike of former euills, to re∣turne vnto God, to seeke remission & grace not to offend in like sort any more, he may notwithstanding the decree of the councell, nay he ought to assure him∣selfe of remission, and grace. And there vpon bringeth forth a cloude of witnes∣ses for confirmation of the certainety of grace. But whatsoeuer wee thinke of the construction he maketh of the wordes of the decree, he c 1.550 resolueth, that a man may bee as certaine that his sinnes are remitted, and he receiued to grace, as that twise two are foure, twise foure eight, and that euery whole is greater then his part, or as a man is resolued touching the things hee seeth with his eyes, and handleth with his hands.

d 1.551 Gaspar Casalius a Bishoppe of Portugall, that was present in the councell of Trent, writeth largely against that kinde of imagined certainety, which Eisingreinius sayth the councell meant to condemne. And then goeth forward; An non licet homini unquam credere firmiter se esse iustum á peccatis, saltem á mortalibus? Quidem in eâ formâ nunquam licet vt ex dictis patet, quia est illa fi∣des siue confidentia, & superba & imprudentissima. An licet in aliâ formâ? Vti∣que licet. In quâ formâ licet? habendo respectum ad divinas promissiones conditio∣nales, & ad conditiones quas requirunt. Etenim omnes tenemur firmiter credere, fide diviná cui non potest subesse falsum, tam de nobis ipsis quam de aliis, omnes A∣dae filios de facto iustos esse, aut iustificari, quotquot habent eas conditiones, quas diuina promissio, sive diuina lex conditionalis, ad id requirit in nobis. Hoc con∣stat, quia omnes tenemur tali fide credere, Deum veracem in omnibus dictis suis, pertinentibus ad doctrinam, promissiones, & cunctis aliis: adhibito autem diligenti in nobis de nobis examine, dum quis seipsum probat, & ad iudicium rationis ac le∣gis trahit, licet vnicuique iudicare de se, prudenter tamen procedendo cum examine & discretione, quòd eas conditiones requisit as habet, vel non habet, Si enim hoc non liceret nobis, non diceret Paulus 1 Cor. 11. Probet autem seipsum homo, & sic de pane illo edat, & de calice bibat. Nec diceret Apostolus Ioannes, 1 Ioh. 4. Nolite omni spiritui credere, sed probate spiritus si ex Deo sint, quoniam multi Pseudoprophetae exierunt in mundum. Ecce committitur nobis probatio adhibitis his quae ad rem ipsam adhiberi debent tum nostritum spirituum. Licet ergo nobis iu∣dicare de nobis benè vel malè, prout in nobis invenerimus: dummodo prudenter a∣gamus, cum prudentiâ intuentes, discurrentes, & concludentes. Mox vero prout quis cum prudentiâ de se iudicaverit, quod conditiones á Deo requisitas habeat, potest etiam iudicare de seipso quod iustus sit, si certò, certò, si cum formidine, cum formidine, firmae enim praestant divinae promissiones iuxta suas conditiones, & ex parte illarum nullus est defectus nec esse potest.

So that according to this opinion, a man certainely finding in him the per∣formance of the condition required, may assure himselfe of his justification & acceptation with God: and this assurance is an act of faith. No man liuing, sayth e 1.552 Vega, should euer draw mee to doubt, neither indeede could I doubt if I would, of my being in the state of grace, if I might inferre it out of two propositions, the one beleeued, and the other some other way evident vnto mee. For there are many propositions de fide, which can no otherwise bee proved to be de fide, but because they cleerely follow vpon things beleeued, & some proposition evident in the light of nature; As Scotus sheweth, that this proposition, the father differeth really from the sonne, is a proposition of faith, because it is inferred out of these two, The father begat and the sonne was be∣gotten, and this other evident in the light of nature, Omnis generans realiter dif∣fert à genito. Qui pertinaciter dubitaret de propositione illatâ evidenter ex vn•…•… credit•…•…, & alia evidenti, esset haereticus, hic enim cum non posset dubitare de conse∣quentiâ, nec de euidenti, dubitaret de credita.

It will bee sayd, that graunting such a proposition to bee de fide, as follow∣eth

out of two propositions, whereof one is beleeued, and the other some o∣ther way evident vnto vs: yet it will not follow that wee may bee certaine, that wee are in the state of grace. Because that cannot bee inferred out of two such propositions, seing one of them must depend on experience, and the knowledge of our inward actions, which as some thinke cannot be certainely knowen by vs. Let vs see therefore whether a man may certainely discerne; the quality and condition of his soule, and the motions, actions, and desires of the same. There are that thinke, that our inward actions are vnknowen vn∣to vs, and that the nature of the heart is such, as is knowen onely to God; But Saint Paul sayth, 1 Cor. 2. that the spirit of a man, knoweth the things that are in him. And besides, if wee could not knowe our inward actions, wee should not bee commaunded or forbidden to doe such actions, neither should wee bee required to confesse our inward sinnes, if wee could not know them. All which things are absurde and hereticall. It is cleere therefore, that wee may know and discerne our inward actions, that wee may know what we do, what wee will, and in what sort, and to what end wee will it. Wee may know therefore, whether we sorrow for sinnes, because wee haue thereby displeased God, or for some other reason; whether wee esteeme the losse of Gods favour the greatest euill; whether wee would rather regaine it, then haue all things without it; whether wee would not bee willing to leaue any thing, though never so deare vnto vs, if wee should vnderstand, that wee must either leaue it, or not come into favour with God.

It is true, sayth * 1.553 Vega, that wee may know all these things; but because there may bee some sinne, that wee thinke not of, thorough forgetfulnes, ig∣norance, or want of consideration, from which if wee depart not, we cannot obtaine the fauour of God; therefore we cannot certainly know, whether wee be so disposed, as is required for the receipt of grace. But this is a silly alle∣gation, for Roffensis adversus Lutherum artic. 14. sayth.

Ignoratio peccato∣rum nihil obstat, quo minus quisquam vere conteri posset, nisi velis cavillum ex vocabulo quaerere; neque enim dubito quin Maria Magdalena verè con∣trita fuerat, quam si Christus interrogasset an verè fuisset contrita, potuit re∣spondisse, se verè contritam esse, verèque doluisse pro peccatis, nec tamen est credibile, quod singula peccata quae prius in tot vanitatibus suis admisit, inte∣gre venerint in ejus memoriam. Sed omittamus hanc quae singulare poeni∣tudinis exemplar fuerat: de communibus loquamur peccatoribus. Num a∣liquot ex his opinaris, ad sacramentum absolutionis accedere cum vero dolo∣re? Num eos usque adeo stupidos arbitraris, ut non sentiant an verè & non fictè doleant? Quod si conscientia fuerit ijs judex quod verè doleant, cur (te quaeso) respondere non licet se verè dolere? Quid huic rei peccatorum obsistit ignoratio? cùm pro cunctis dolere possint tam ignoratis quam cog∣nitis. Nam qui damni perpendit immensitatem, quod ex peccato conquisi∣vit, is odiet facile peccatum, & detestabitur tam in alijs quam in seipso, neque minus id quod occultum est quam quod est agnitum. So that we may rea∣son

thus, If a man sorrow, or sorrow not for sinne; or not for the true causes, or not so much as he should; either hee may know when he doth right, and when he faileth, or not: If he may, then a man may know when he is in such a disposi∣tion, as is required in him that is to be justified. If he may not, then he hath no power to sorrow, or to sorrow in this or that sort. For no mā hath power to do that act, that he knoweth not how to do: neither doth any man know how to doe a thing, but he knoweth likewise when he doth the same thing, whether he doe so or not. If he haue no power to sorrow for sinne, or to sorrow so and in such sort as he should, then God hath commanded things impossible to bee done, Impossible, I say, in respect both of Nature and grace.

s 1.554 They will say a man knoweth when he sorroweth rightly for each particu∣lar sinne, but not when for all in generall: But against this as before, if he knowe

how rightly to sorrow for all, then he knoweth when he doth so, but he know∣eth how rightly to sorrow for all. If he know not rightly how to sorrow for all, then he cannot rightly sorrow for all; If hee cannot rightly sorrow for all, then either God hath not commaunded so to doe, or hee hath commaunded im∣possibilities: if he haue not commaunded vs in this sort to sorrow for all, then for none, for wee * 1.555 cannot rightly sorrow for one, vnlesse wee sorrow for all: for if wee might, we might haue remission of one, and not of another, then wee might be in the state of saluation & damnation together.

g 1.556 Vega having debated the matter, alleadging the objections and answeares of both sides, for and against the certainty of grace, in the end concludeth, that hauing maturely considered all that is sayd on either side, hee thinketh it more probable, that some spirituall men, may so farre profitte in spirituall exercise and in diuine familiarity, that without all rashnes, they may beleeue certainely, and without all doubting, that they haue found grace and remission of sinnes with God; and bringeth many excellent proofes of that his saying; As, that the law of friendship requireth so much; for it cannot bee, that one friend should not powre forth his very soule to another. And that familiaritie and excee∣ding loue, that the Canticles shew that God beareth towards his Church, and somtimes sheweth to it, make it evident, there are alwayes some to whom God speaketh so familiarly, that they are certaine, and no way doubt of his loue. Be∣sides, the resolution and securitie with which many of the Saints of God goe out of this world, that ardent desire,

quo charitas cum perfecta fuerit, cla∣mat, Cupio dissolui & esse cum Christo, illa laetitia, quâ permulti exultant, dum intelligentes sibi propinquum esse diem mortis, dicunt cum Davide: Laetatus sum in his quae dicta sunt mihi, in domum Domini ibimus. Alacri∣tas etiam & admiranda constantia Martyrum, & despicientia omnium tor∣mentorum, are a sufficient proofe of this; they would neuer doe so that

doubted of their estate.

h 1.557 Ambrose in Ps. 118. Videmus in saeculo inno∣centes laetos ad iudicium festinare, odisse moras, celeritatem affectare iudi∣cij. Beatus itaque ille qui coeleste judicium laetus expectat: scit enim sibi reg∣num coelorum, Angelorum consortium, coronam quoque bonorum reposi∣tam esse meritorum. And i 1.558 Catharinus in his purgation of himselfe, shew∣eth

the same in the examples of many Saints; Such confidence Ezechias may bee thought to haue had, 2. Reg. 12. when he prayed thus; Remember Lord how I haue walked before thee &c: where this his prayer is approued by Gods answeare, I haue heard thy prayer &c. k 1.559 The testimonie of the spirit seemeth to require,

vt aliquibus saltem viris perfectis, & spiritualibus, hoc ipsum de adoptione in particulari semper contestetur interius: vt quilibet iustorum ex eo testimonio verè possitaudacter clamare, Abba, pater; Et verbum istud spiritui nostro, huc videtur nos vocare & inflectere. Cumque illud testimo∣nium, quicquid sit de intelligentiâ Pauli, dubium non sit, vt & sancti docto∣res saepe tradiderunt, persaepe interius exhiberi à spiritu sancto, loquente in∣terius familiarissime cum his, qui ei toto corde famulantur, consentaneum non est, neque verisimile, quin aliquando ita sese illis aperiat, vt omnem abi∣gat for•…•…dinem de ipsorum poenitentiâ, & eorum iustificatione, praesertim cum teste Paulo, ad hoc detur nobis, vt sciamus, quae nobis à Deo sunt do∣nata.

This certainty hee calleth morall, distinguisheth it from the certainty of •…•…aith, that he may avoyd the decree of the councell of Trent: and yet saith it excludeth all doubt and feare, of the being otherwise of that he is thus certaine of: and saith if any man will name this a certainty of faith hee will not striue. l 1.560 The difference hee maketh betweene them is this, that in the one men are sure and know, they neither are nor can be deceiued: in the other they knowe and are certaine that they are not, not that they cannot bee deceiued. But this difference cannot staud, for if a man know and bee certaine that hee is not

deceiued, he must certainly know, that no such thing doth now fall out, as doth fall out when men are deceiued in apprehensions of this kind, and consequent∣ly, that now and things so standing, he cannot be deceiued. For example, a man dreaming, thinketh he is waking, and vndoubtedly perswadeth himselfe, hee seeth or doth something, wherein he is deceiued, because it is but representa∣tion in a dreame; but he that is waking, knoweth that he waketh, that hee seeth that which he thinketh he seeth, that in this perswasion hee is not, nor cannot be deceiued things so standing.

Amongst the Articles agreed vpon in the m 1.561 conference at Ratisbon, 1541, this is one,

Docendum est ut qui vere poenitent, semper fide certissimâ statuant, se propter Mediatorem Christum Deo placere: quia Christus est propitiator, Pontifex, & interpellator pro nobis, quem pater donavit nobis, & omnia bona cum illo. Quoniam autem perfecta rectitudo in hac imbecillitate non est, sunt{que} multae infirmae & pavidae conscientiae, quae cum gravi saepe dubitatione luctantur, nemo est à gratiâ Christi, propter ejusmodi infirmitatem excluden∣dus: sed convenit tales diligenter adhortari, ut ijs dubitationibus promissio∣nes Christi fortiter opponant, & augeri sibi fidem sedulis precibus orent: juxta illud, Adauge nobis Domine fidem. So that touching this point it is evident that the Church of God euer taught, that which we now teach.

Neither haue wee departed from the doctrine of the Church, in that wee teach that faith onely justifieth. For many of the ancient haue vsed this forme of words; as Origen ad Rom. 3.

Dicit Apostolus sufficere solius fidei justificati∣onem, ita ut credens quis tantummodo justificetur, etiamsi nihil ab eo operis fuerit expletum. Hilar. can. 8. in Math. Fides sola justificat. Basil. homil. de hu∣militate. Haec est perfecta & integra gloriatio in Deo, quando neque ob justi∣tiam suam quis se iactat, sed novit quidem seipsum verae justitiae indigum, solâ autem fide in Christum justificatum. Ambros. ad Rom. 3. Iustificati sunt gratis, quia nihil operantes, neque vicem reddentes, solâ fide justificati sunt dono Dei. Chrysost. Homil. de fide & lege naturae: Eum qui operatur opera iustitiae sine fide non potes probare vivum esse, fidem absque operibus possum monstrare, & vixisse, & regnum coelorum assecutam, nullus sine fide vitam habuit, latro autem credidit tantum, & iustificatus est. Aug. l. 1. contra 2 Epistolas Pelag. c. 21. Quantaelibet fuisse virtutis antiquòs praedices justos, non eos salvos fecit nisi fides mediatoris. 83. q. q. 76. Si quis cùm crediderit mox de hâc vi∣ta decesserit, iustificatio fidei manet cum illo: nec praecedentibus bonis operi∣bus, quia non merito ad illam, sed gratiâ pervenit, nec consequentibus, quia in hac vita esse non sinitur. Theophylact. ad Galat. 3. Nunc planè ostendit Aposto∣lus, fidem vel solam, iustificandi habere in se virtutem. Bern. ser. 22, in Cantic. Quisquis pro peccatis compunctus, esurit & sitit iustitiam, credat in te qui iu∣stificas impium, & solam iustificatus per fidem, pacem habebitad te. Et ep. 77. citans illud. Qui crediderit & baptizatus fuerit salvus erit. Cautè, inquit, non re∣petiit, qui vero baptizatus non fuerit, condēnabitur, sed tantū qui vero non cre∣diderit, innuens nimirum solam fidem interdum sufficere ad salutem, & sine illâ sufficere nihil.

Sometimes by these phrases of speech they exclude all that may bee be without supernaturall knowledge, all that may be without a true profession. Sometimes the necessity of good workes in act or externall good workes. 3. The power of nature without illumination and grace. 4. The power of the Law. 5. The sufficiency of any thing found in vs to make vs stand in judge∣ment, to abide the tryall, and not to feare condemnation. And in this sense faith onely is said to justifie, that is, the onely mercy of God, and merite of Christ apprehended by faith: and then the meaning of their speech is, that onely the perswasion and assured trust that they haue, to bee accepted of God for Christs sake, is that that maketh them stand in judgement, without feare of condemna∣tion. And in this sense all the Diuines formerly alleadged, for proofe of the

insufficiency of all our inherent righteousnesse, and the trust which wee should haue in the onely mercy of God, and merite of Christ, doe teach as wee doe, that faith onely iustifieth. For neither they nor we exclude from the worke of Iustification, the action of God as the supreme and highest cause of our iustifi∣cation: for it is he that remitteth sinne, and receiueth vs to grace: nor the me∣rit of Christ, as that for which God inclineth to shew mercy to vs, and to re∣spect vs: nor the remission of sinnes, gratious acceptation, and grant of the gift of righteousnes, as that by which we are formally justified: nor those works of prenenting grace, whereby out of the generall apprehension of faith, God wor∣keth in vs dislike of our former condition, desire to be reconciled to God, to haue remission of that is past, & grace hereafter to decline the like euils, & to do contrary good things. For by these wee are prepared, disposed, and fitted for iustification; without these none are iustified. And in this sense, & to imply a necessity of these to be found in us, sometimes the fathers & others say, that we are not justified by faith only. And we all agree, that it is not our conuersion to God, nor the change we find in our selues, that can any way make us stād in judgment without feare, and looke for any good from God, otherwise then in that we find our selues so disposed and fitted, as is necessary for justification, whence we assure our selues, God will in mercy accept us for Christs sake.

CHAP. 12.

Of Merit.

MErit as Cardinall Contarenus rightly noteth, if we speake properly, importeth an action, or actions, quibus actionibus aut earum autori, ab altero iusticia postulante, debeatur praemiū. No man can merit any thing of God. a 1.562 First because we are his seruants, & owe much more seruice vnto him thē bond-slaues that are bought for money owe vnto their masters: & though no reward were promised, we were bound to obey his commands. Yet if we looke on the bounty of God, he deales with us being bond-men, as * 1.563 with hired seruants, recōpencing that with a reward which we stood bound in duty to performe. 2. Because no profit cōmeth vnto God frō any thing we can * 1.564 do: the good & saluation of our soules he accounteth his gaine, and out of his goodnesse so esteemeth of our good workes, as if they were profitable unto him. 3. Because though our workes were profitable vnto God, and though we were able to do them of our selues, yet wee could neuer repay vnto him so much good, as wee haue already & do dayly receiue from him: but now it is so, that he first bestoweth on us one gift, which he may afterwards reward with another. 4 Because in many things we offend all, & so haue neede of pardon: so farre are wee from meriting any thing at Gods hands. 5 Because no meritori∣ous act is so great a good as eternall life, & so not equiualent vnto it, and there∣fore so great a reward cannot in strictnesse of justice be due vnto it. Actus se∣cundum se consideratus (sayth ^• Scotus) abs{que} acceptatione diuinâ secundum stri∣ctam justitiam, non fuisset dignus tali praemio ex intrinseca bonitate, quam haberet ex suis principiis, quod patet, quia semper praemium est majus bonum merito, & ju∣stitia stricta non reddit melius pro minus bono: ideo bene dicitur quod semper Deus praemiat vltra meritum condignum, vniuersaliter quidem vltra dignitatem actus qui est meritum; quia quod ille actus sit condignum meritū, hoc est vltra naturam & bonitatē actus intrinsecā, ex mera gratuita acceptatione diuina. Et forte adhuc, vl∣tra illud ad quod de cōmuni lege esset actus acceptandus, quando{que} Deus praemiat ex mera liberalitate. And againe, Lib. 4. dist. 49. q. 6. de tertio dubio. De praemio quod est aeterna beatitudo, dico quod loquendo de stricta justitia, Deus nulli no∣strum propter quaecunque merita, est debitor perfectionis reddendae tam intensae, quam est beatitudo, propter immoderatum excessum illius perfectionis vltra illa merita: sed esto quod ex liberalitate sua determinasset, meritis conferre actum tam perfectum

tanquam praemium, tali quidem justitia qualis decet eum, scilicet, supererogantis in praemijs: tamen non sequitur ex hoc necessario, quòd per illam justitiam sit reddenda perfectio perennis tanquam praemium: imo abundans fieret retributio in beatitudine vnius momenti.

6. To merit is to make a thing due, that was not due before, whence it fol∣loweth that no man can merit eternall life. b 1.565 For they that define merit do say, that no man can merit soe great a good as eternall life ex condigno, vnlesse he be first justified, reconciled to God, and made partaker of the diuine nature, but whosoeuer is soe justified, reconciled to God, and made partaker of the diuine nature, hath right to eternall life, in that hee is justified, reconci∣led, and made partaker of the diuine nature. Therefore seeing to merit, is to make that due that was not due before, noe man can merit eternall life. And c 1.566 Bellarmine confesseth, that many thinke eternall life cannot be merited; but onely some degrees in the same. and for this reason, as it appeareth by the epistle of Cardinall Contarenus to Cardinall Farnesius, the diuines of both sides in the conference at Ratisbon, thought good to omitte and suppresse the name of merit. 1 For that it might be thought a derogation to the goodnesse and bounty of God, that giueth vs freely eternall life, to say that wee meritte it. And secondly, for that it might be conceiued, that it was not due before in respect of free gift, and that our working could merit it, though it were not due to vs by gift. Let vs see therefore what the Church of God hath taught tou∣ching merit.

The Author of the answere to Bells challenge named by him the downefall of Popery, article the fift chapt: 3. pag. 220. protesteth, that Bell doth greatly wronge the Romanists, in saying it is a part of their faith, and that it was defined in the councell of Trent, that good workes done in Gods grace, are cōdignely meritorious of eternall life; for the councell defined no such thing, and they that hold it, hold it not as a point of faith, but as an opinion onely. Whereupon Vega, who was one of the duines of the councell of Trent, writeth de fide & operib•…•… quaest: 4. that some noble Schoole diuines, being moued with no light arguments, and vsing a certaine sober and prudent moderation, haue denied that there is any condigne merit of eternall happinesse; and hee sayth quest. 5. * 1.567 that Gregory, Durand, Marsil, Walden, Burgensis, and Ec∣kius, doe deny condigne merit. Sotus also another diuine of the sayd coun∣cell lib. 3. de naturâ & gratiâ cap. 7. sayth, that there is some difference a∣mongst catholiques about condigne merit, and chap: 8. after he had proued con∣digne merit out of the councell and otherwaies, yet concludeth not that it is a point of faith, but onely calleth it conclusionem probatissimam, a most approued conclusion. And Bellarmine lib: 5: de iustificatione cap: 16: after hee had re∣hearsed two opinions of catholiques, whereof the one seemeth to deny condigne merit, the other admitteth it only in a large sense, proposeth and defendeth the third opinion, which defendeth condigne merit absolutely, onely as verissimam, & communem sententiam theologorum, most true, and the common opinion of diuines. This confession might suffice to proue, that the Church neuer admit∣ted of the doctrine of merit of condignity, as any point of her faith, in the daies of our Fathers, seeing euen since these differences grewe that are now afoote, betweene those of the reformation, and the stiffe maintainers of all confusi∣ons formerly found in the state of the Church and religion, there are many found amongst the enemies of reformation, that reiect the merit of con∣dignity. Yet for the better satisfaction of the reader, I will more fully and at large sette downe the opinions, of them that opposed against the doctrine of meritte properly soe named before LVTHERS time.

d 1.568 Gregorius Ariminensis, besides the reason formerly alleaged, that no act of

man, though done in, & out of the habite of charity, is so great a good as eter∣nall life, and equivalent to it, & consequently that so great a reward as eternall life, cannot be due vnto it ex debito iustitiae; hath sundry other reasons for proof of the same.

Intelligendum est, saith he, etiam ipsa hominis bona merita esse Dei munera, quibus cum vita aeterna redditur, quid aliud nisi gratia pro gratia redditur? haec Augustinus. Idem Antecedens probatur ratione: Nam con∣stat quod animae carenti charitate simul & gloriâ: Deus quantum ad neutram est illi debitor: & si dat charitatem, gratis donat. Nunc autem nullus diceret, quod ex eo quod Deus donat aliquod munus alicui, fiat ei alterius muneris debitor. Ergo non ex eo quod Deus gratis dat charitatem, debetur consequen∣ter ipsi animae gloria, sive beatitudo aeterna. Et si dicatur quod non ideo debe∣tur alicui vita aeterna, quia habet charitatem, aut quia data est charitas illi, sed quia secundùm acceptam charitatem operatur. Contra, quòd omnes ope∣rationes nostrae secundùm charitatem factae, & omnia merita nostra sunt Dei dona, ut dicit Augustinns 13 de trinitate cap. 10. & autoritate ejusdem praeallegatâ, & per consequens non ex illis est Deus debitor alterius praemij. Ad quartum dicendum, quod cùm sit justitia vnicui{que} reddere quod suum est, id est, sibi debitum, secundùm sententiam Augustini 1. de Libero Arbitrio, sic vita aeterna juste meritoriè redditur operanti. Et dicitur corona justitiae, sicut ei debita est, pro talibus operibus meritorijs. Eis autem non est simpliciter debita, nec ex natura ipsorum, sed solùm ex gratuita ordinatione Dei, qui ex a∣bundantia misericordiae suae, statuit tales actus vitâ aeternâ praemiare: propter quam statutam gratiae legem, sibi debita dicitur & justè retribui, & secundùm hanc considerationem, posset etiam dici stipendium bonorum operum vita ae∣terna. Ad quem intellectum loquitur etiam Augustinus in lib. de gratia, & lib. arbit. & tamen simpliciter gratis donatur, & vt ibi dicit Augustinus gratia pro gratia redditur. Vnde & glossa super illud Apostoli 2 ad Tim. 4. Bonum certamen certavi, cursum consummavi, fidem servavi: in reliquo re∣posita est mihi corona justitiae, quam reddet mihi Dominus in illa die justus Iudex, &c. dicit, quod vita aeterna est gratia pro gratia. Et ideò sicut no∣tat Augustinus super eisdem verbis 1. lib. ad Simplicianum, quamvis Apo∣stolus dixerit reddet, quasi jam sit ex debito, cùm tamen ascendit in altum, sci∣licet Christus, captivavit captivitatem, non reddidit, sed dedit dona homi∣nibus, volens per hoc Augustinus innuere, quod cum aeterna vita datur ju∣stis, non tam redditur quam donatur. Ex eodem sensu intelligendae sunt glossae, cùm justus dicitur retribuendo bona pro bonis, & misericors re∣tribuendo bona pro malis, non quia non sit utrobique misericordia, sed quia magis apparet misericordia in dando bona pro malis, & in dando bona pro bonis generaliter loquendo, videtur quaedam justitia ratione conformitatis meriti ad praemium, in hac generali ratione, quia utrumque bonum est, in hac tamen speciali retributione utique misericordia est, vnde in glossa prius alle∣gata sequitur immediate, & ipsa tamen justitia, quâ retribuuntur bona pro bo∣nis, non est sine misericordia. Huic etiam concordat commune dictum docto∣rum dicentium, quod Deus praemiat ultra condignum, ergo vita aeterna non debetur ex condigno meritis nostris.

e 1.569 Durandus clearely and fully agreeth with Scotus and Ariminensis, distingui∣shing merite of condignity, making it to be of two sorts.

Quoddam est meritum de condigno largè sumpto, pro quadam dignitate quam Deus ex ordinatione requirit in operibus nostris, ad hoc vt remunerentur vita aeterna, & haec digni∣tas est in nobis per gratiam & charitatem habitualem. Aliud est meritum de condigno strictè & proprie accepto, & tale meritū est actio voluntaria, prop∣ter quam alicui merces debetur ex justitia, sic quod si non reddatur, ille ad quē pertinet reddere injuste facit, & est simpliciter & propriè injustus, & tale me∣ritum de condigno invenitur inter homines, sed non est hominis ad Deum. Quod patet, quia quod redditur potius ex liberalitate dantis, quàm ex debito

operis, non cadit sub merito de condigno stricte sumpto; sed quicquid à Deo accipimus, sive sit gratia, sive sit gloria, sive bonum temporale, vel spirituale, praecedente in nobis propter hoc quocun{que} bono opere; potius & principalius accipimus ex liberalitate Dei, quam reddatur ex debito operis; ergo nihil peni∣tus cadit sub merito de condigno sic accepto. Facilius & minus est reddere ae∣quivalens ejus quod quis accepit ab alio, quam eum constituere debitorem, sed nullus potest reddere Deo aequivalens; Deo & parentibus nemo potest red∣dere aequivalens secundum philosophum; ergo multo minus est possibile, quod ex quocun{que} nostro opere Deus fiat nobis debitor: All that we are and haue, whe∣ther

good actions, good habits or good vse of things, it is all from the goodnes of God,

ex dono gratuito nullus obligatur ad dandum amplius, sed potius recipiens ma∣gis obligatur danti, ideo ex bonis habitibus, & ex bonis actibus siue vsibus no∣bis à Deo datis, Deus non obligatur nobis ex aliquo debito justitiae, ad aliquid amplius dandum, ita quod si non dederit sit injustus, sed potius nos sumus Deo obligati: & sentire seu dicere oppositum est temerarium seu blasphemum. Ex hoc quod Deus dat quaedam non obligatur ad dandum alia, ita vt non dando sit injustus, & si quid pro bonis operibus nostris nobis datur vel redditur, po∣tius & principalius est ex liberalitate Dei dantis, quā ex debito nostri operis. Quod si quis dicat quod quamvis Deus non constituatur nobis debitor ex ali∣quo nostro opere, constituitur tamen debitor ex suâ promissione. Non valet propter duo; Primum est quia promissio divina in scripturis sanctis, non sonat in aliquam obligationem, sed insinuat meram dispositionem liberalitatis divinae; Secundum est quia quod redditur, nō ex debito praecedentis operis, sed ex pro∣missione praecedente, non quidem redditur ex merito operis de condigno; sed solum vel principaliter ex promisso. Sicut reddere justum preciū pro re accep∣tâ ab aliquo est actus justitiae, ita recompensare mercedem, vel praemium labo∣ris nostri operis est actus justitiae. Et ideo in illis in quibus est simpliciter ju∣stum, etiam simpliciter ratio meriti & praemij seu mercedis; in quibus autem nō est simpliciter justum sed secundum quid, in his non est simpliciter ratio me∣riti, sed secundum quid: inter Deum autem & hominem, non potest esse justum simpliciter, sicut nec aequale, sed solum justum secundum quid, scilicet domina-, tivum, quia totum bonū qvod est hominis, est Dei & à Deo, & multo amplius quam actiones serui sint sui Domini in humanis, propter quod meritum homi∣nis apud Deum, non potest esse meritum simpliciter de condigno, sed solum secundum praesuppositionem divinae ordinationis, ita scilicet vt homo id con∣sequatur á Deo per suam operationem quasi praemium, ad quod Deus ei vir∣tutem operandi deputavit. Et supra dicit; maximam esse inaequalitatem inter opus nostrum & vitam aeternam, nec valere quod quidam dicunt, quod sit quae∣dam aequalitas secundum quod ex gratiâ spiritus sancti procedit, & quod valor ejus attenditur secundum virtutem spiritus sancti moventis nos in vitam aeter∣ternam. Bellar. de Iustific. l. 5. c. 16. Durandus videtur omnino velle merita no∣stra ex gratiâ Dei procedentia, & positâ promissione, adhuc non esse talia vt ijs ex justitiâ debeatur merces, sed ex solâ Dei liberalitate.

Thomas Waldensis tom. 3. de sacramentalibus c. 7. confuting this saying imputed to Wickliffe,

Confidat homo in merito proprio, quia ad mensuram illius Deus ne∣cessario praemiabit, alleageth out of Aug: Deus non inveniret aliquid in homini∣bus nisi ad interitum, si cum ijs ageret per pondera meritorū. Super illud Ps. 94. Praeoccupemus faciē ejus in confessione. Quomodo distinguis, vota quae reddis Deo: vt eum laudes, te accuses, quia illius est misericordia, vt peccata nostra dimittat: nā si vellet pro meritis agere, non inveniret, nisi quos damna∣ret; haec Aug: Et cum illud obiiceretur 2 Tim. 4. Bonum certamen certaui, cursum consummaui &c: Quamvis bona opera recoluit, tamē non in eis confidit, qui so∣li Deo gloriā dedit. Et cum omnia faceret: non autē ego, inquit, sed gratia Dei mecum. Hanc item normam observat Psalmista cum dicit. Retribuet mihi Do∣minus * 1.570 secundum iustitiam meam, & secundum innocentiam meā super me. sed

his verbis praemisit: quoniam voluit me. Gratiam ergo voluntatis ejus prae •…•…u∣mens, descendit ad innocentiam actionis. Et Cassiodorus: dicit Apostolus, De reliquo reposita est mihi corona justitiae &c: non qd suis aliquid meritis humilis applicabat, sed quia praemissis beneficijs domini, jam deberi posse praemium confidebat. Hoc non erat in meritis cōfidere, sed in beneficijs Domini. Et supra: Nec hoc dico quin accepta gratia fiduciā praestet orandi, sed omnino non oportet vt fiduciam in eâ constituat quisquam impetrandi. Hoc solum confe∣runt haec prima dona, ab eâ misericordiâ, quae tribuit haec, vt speremus & am∣pliora. And he addeth, Quantum mea sapit modicitas, haec ipsa determinatio scripturarum, quam sic ex Apostolo & Psalmistâ annotant sancti patres, congru∣entius jungeretur locutionibus de meritis hominum, quàm absolute diceretur quod homo ex meritis est dignus regno coelorū, aut hac gratiâ, vel illâ gloriâ: quamuis quidam Scholastici inuenerunt ad hoc dicendum, terminos de condig∣no & congruo. At Chrysostomus dicit, Quid dignum facimus in hoc seculo, vt participes domini nostri, in regnis coelestibus fieri mereamur? Ideo justè dicit Apostolus, Existimo quod non sunt condignae passiones hujus temporis ad futu∣ram gloriam. Reputo igitur saniorem theologum, fideliorē catholicum, & scrip∣turis sanctis magis concordem, qui tale meritum simpliciter abnegat, & cū mo∣dificatione Apostoli & scripturarū, concedit quia simpliciter quis non meretur regnū coelorū, sed ex gratia Dei, aut voluntate largitoris. Sic enim dicit Aposto∣lus, Non qd sufficiētes simus existimare aliquid à nobis: sed sufficiētia nostra ex Deo est. 2. Cor. 3. Haec locutio crebra esset in ore peritorum fidelium, vt Pelagi∣anis qui gratiam Dei •…•…acent vel abnegant, & in meritis hominum omnino confi∣dunt, ex parte gratiae Dei inueniremur esse discordes, sicut omnes sancti priores vs{que} ad recentes Scholasticos, & cōmunis scripsit ecclesia. Vnde in oratione Ca∣nonis ad Deum. Non aestimator meriti, sed veniae quaesumus largitor admitte &c: Feriâ quartâ passionis: Vt qui de meritorum qualitate diffidimus, non judi∣cium tuum, sed misericordiā consequi mereamur. Et in secretâ oratione domi∣nicae

secudae advētus: Vbi nulla suppetūt suffragia meritorū, tuae nobis indulgen∣tiae

succurre praesidijs. Meritum nostrum in articulo minimè Deus attendit, siue rationem congrui, vel condigni, sed gratiam suam, aut voluntatem suam, aut misericordiam suam.

Paulus Burgensis in additione in Psalm. 35.

Manifestum quod misericordia Dei maximè relucet in Coelo, vbi beati misericordiam Dei plenè consequun∣tur, vt in Math: 5. cujus ratio est, nam gloriam coelestem nullus de condigno secundum legem communem meretur. Vnde Apostolus ad Rom: 8. Non sunt condignae passiones &c: f 1.571 Cassander sayth, he found it thus written by a cer∣taine schoole-man in an old manuscript, Nota quod cum dicitur, Deus pro bonis meritis dabit vitam aeternam: pro, primo notat signum, vel viam, vel occasio∣nem aliquam: sed si dicatur propter bona merita dabit vitam aeternam, prop∣ter, notat causam efficientem. Ideo non recipitur à quibusdam, sed hanc reci∣piunt, pro bonis meritis, & consimiles earum, assignantes differentiam inter pro & propter. g 1.572 Thomas Bradwardin in summa contra Pelagianos, Dispu∣tat meritum non esse causam aeterni praemij, cumque scriptura & doctores confirment, Deum praemiaturum bonos propter merita sua bona, propter non significare causam propriè, sed impropriè, vel causam cognoscendi, vel ordinem, vel denique dispositionem subjecti. Bernard: de gratiâ & libero arbitrio. Merita nostra sunt via regni non causa regnandi. Ca∣maracensis in 4. quaest: 1: artic: 1. Quia causa est illud ad cujus esse sequitur aliquid. Dupliciter potest aliquid dici causa: vno modo propriè, quando ad praesentiam esse vnius, virtute ejus ex naturâ rei se∣quitur esse alterius, & sic ignis est causa caloris: alio modo impropriè, quando ad praesentiam esse vnius sequitur esse alterius, non tamen virtute ejus, nec ex natura rei, sed ex solâ voluntate alterius, & sic actus meritorius dicitur causa

respectu praemij: (subdit autem) causa sine quâ non, non debet simpliciter &

absolutè dici causa, quia propriè non est causa. And the same Cameracensis proueth at large, that there is no condigne meriting of eternall life.

Manipulus Curatorum, fol. 129. Quare melius dicimus, adveniat regnum tuum, quam dicamus adveniamus in regnum tuum? dico quod ad denotandū, quod gloria Paradisi non habetur ex propriis meritis, sed ex mera gratia Dei, iuxta verbum Apostoli dicentis, Non ex operibus iustitiae quae fecimus nos.

Sed secundùm misericordiam salvos nos fecit, non autem dicimus, adveniamus,

quia ut dictum est, ex meritis nostris non possumus ad illud venire, nemo po∣test venire ad me, nisi pater meus traxerit illum, ut dicitur Ioan. h 1.573 Stephanus Brulepher l. 1. d. 17. following the opinion of Scotus, layeth down two propositions, the first, Nullus actus elicitus ex charitate, & secundùm inclinationem chari∣tatis, quantum cunque bonus sit, est dignus vitâ aeternâ ex naturâ rei: probatur, Non sunt condignae passiones &c. Christus in Evangelio cum feceritis omnia, &c. Sed si homo faceret actus ex naturâ rei dignos aeterno praemio, non esset servus inutilis: the second, Omnis actus elicitus ab habente charitatem; & secundùm inclinationem charitatis, solum est dignus vitâ aeternâ, propter pas∣sivam acceptationem Dei. Quid sit autem acceptare, Scotus explicat ipse di∣cens, acceptare est velle aliquem secundùm dispositionem quam nunc habet, esse dignum tali praemio, quem prius non voluit esse dignum; verbi gratia, sit aliquis gravis peccator, non modo non dignus coelesti praemio, verumetiam

dignissimus qui sempiterno supplicio afficiatur, convertatur is ad Deum, stude∣at

eum placare jejuniis, orationibus, eleemosynis; quamvis haec omnia naturâ suâ non sint ejusmodi, ut sint coelesti praemio digna; tamen secundùm has dis∣positiones acceptat Deus hominem ex gratuita sua bonitate, & vult esse dig∣num tali praemio.

Anselm. Si homo mille annis serviret Deo etiam ferventissime, non mere∣retur ex condigno dimidium diem esse in regno coelorum, l. de mensurat. cru∣cis. i 1.574 Simon de Cassia, Neminem Deus nisi per misericordiam salvat, nec re∣probat nisi justo judicio. Drogo l. de Sacramento dominicae passionis: Terra mentis nostrae est velut chaos quoddam, confusione teterrimum & involutum, ignorans tam sinem suum quam principium, & naturae suae modum, nisi quod a summo Creatore de nihilo mirabiliter factam se credit, & post hanc vitam, vel ad inferos pro suis meritis, vel ad coelos pro misericordiâ sui autoris transferendam. k 1.575 Rogerus Benedictinus scribens vitam Brunonis Archiepiscopi Colon. ante annos 500 sic orditur, sapientiae nimirum est scire, unde sit donum quod quis accipit, nè à se sibi hoc esse, aut à Deo quidem sed sibi debitum pu∣tet, si enim quaerimus quid nobis debeatur, nihil inveniemus nisi supplicium, misericordia autem Dei praerogauit nobis gratiam, ut haberet quibus redderet gratiam pro gratia, & hoc jam esset debitum, quia Deus voluit, non quiahomo meruit, quid enim habes, ait Apostolus, quod non accepisti, si autem acce∣pisti quid gloriaris quasi non acceperis? Bernard, Sufficit ad meritum, scire quod non sufficiunt merita; in Cantica ser. 68. Et serm. 61. Meum proinde meritum miseratio domini: non plane sum meriti inops, quamdiu ille miserationum non fuerit; quod si misericordiae domini multae, multis nihilo∣minus ego in meritis sum; quid enim si multorum sim mihi conscius delicto∣rum? nempe vbi abundavit delictum, superabundavit & gratia. Et si misericor∣diae domini ab aeterno, & usque in aeternum, ego quoque misericordias domini in aeternum cantabo. Num quid justitias meas? Domine memorabor iustitiae tuae solius: ipsa est enim & mea, nempe factus es mihi tu justitia à Deo. & ser. 68. Merita habere cures, habita donata noveris, fructum speraveris Dei mise∣ricordiam, & omne periculum evasisti, paupertatis, ingratitudinis, praesump∣tionis. Haimo in ps. 131. Nemo debet de suis meritis praesumere, sed omnē salvationē ex Christi meritis expectare Hier. in Es. 64. Si nostra conside∣remus merita desperandū est, si tuā autem clementiā qui flagellas omnē filium quē recipis, audemus preces fundere, tu enim pater noster es. Orig. in 4. ad Ro.

Cum considero sermonis eminentiam, quòd dicit, operanti secundum debitum reddi, vix mihi suadeo quod possit vllum opus esse, quod ex debito remunerationem Dei deposcat.

Theodoret: explicans illud l 1.576, Vae qui accepit super eam opprobrium, Hominum inquit salus ex solâ Dei misericordiâ pendet, neque enim hanc adipiscimur praemi∣um & mercedem iustitiae, sed Dei bonitatis donum est. Explicans illud Psalmi 23. Hic accipiet benedictionem à Domino. Ingeniosè admodum misericordiam cum benedictione coniunxit. Etenim quae existimantur remunerationes, propte•…•… lam diuinam benignitatem hominibus praebentur. Omnes enim hominum iustitiae nihil sunt ad dona, quae â Deo nobis suppeditata sunt, nedum ad futura munera, quae omnem humanam cogitationem transcendunt. Basil: in Psal. explicans illud, Propter nomen tuum propitiaberis peccato meo. Ego te inquit oro vt propitius sis peccatis meis, non propter exactam meam poenitentiam, sed propter benignitatis nomen quod habes; explicans illum Psal. 142. locum Exaudi me in iustitiâ tuâ. Quid facuô homo? infra dicis non iustificabitur in conspectu tuo omnis viuens, & si iniquitates observaueris &c: & hic secundum iustitiam exaudiri petis? quid est igitur quod dicit? iustitiam hic benignitatem Dei dicit, & hoc multis in locis vider•…•… potest, & valde merito. Apud homines enim iustitia misericordiâ caret, apud Deum ve∣ro non ita, sed immixta est misericordiâ, atque ita immixta, vt ipsa iustitia benig∣nitas vocetur. Chrysost: in Psal. 4. Etiamsi innumerabilia rectè fecerimus, á mise∣ricordiâ & clementiâ audimur, etiamsi ad ipsum fastigium virtutis pervenerimus, servamur á misericordia. Ambros: in Psal: 118. Semper homo etiamsi sanctus & iustus sic debet orare, vt exaudiat eum secundum misericordiam suam, non se∣cundum meritum virtutis alicuius.

Hitherto I haue sufficiently proved, that both the latter Schoolemen & the more auncient fathers, reiected the merit of condignity; I will onely adde the testimony of a great learned man, that liued immediately before Luthers time, and the opinion of some of the best learned after his time, and so conclude this poynt. Gocchianus part: 3. c. 6. Aquinas scripto tertio in sent: d. 18. dicit actum charitate informatum, mereri vitam aeternam ex condigno, quia inter huiusmodi meritum & praemium, invenitur aequalitas secundum rectam aestimationem, & hu∣iusmodi meritum innititur divinae iustitiae. Contra Paulus Rom. 4. si Abra∣ham ex operibus &c: vbi dicit glossa Aug. in lib. de spiritu & litterâ, quod actus hominis quantumvis sit informatus charitate, tamen non potest esse tam perfectaeiu∣stitiae, vt ex debito mereatur praemium beatitudinis aeternae, & examplificat de Apo∣stolis, In multis offendimus omnes, & iterum, si dixerimus quia peccatum non ha∣bemus &c: Quis vestrum habens servum &c: docet suos quod ex operibus iustitiae de fide formatâ procedentibus, non debet expectari praemium aternae beatitudinis ex debito iustitiae, tanquam fecissent Deum sibi debitorem per huiusmodi. 1 Quia ni∣hil vtilitatis Deo ex nostris operibus accrescit. 2 Quia quicquid facere possumus, ex debito servitutis debuimus; Attende servum tam in agro quam domo laboran∣tem, & tamen à Domino suo ex debito iustitiae nec gratias merentem; Vt ex praemis∣sis advertere potes, homo per quoscun{que} actus suos qualitercunque factos, mereri non potest, quia omnium operum suorum quae facere potest debitor est, & ideo ecclesia i•…•… fide Christi fundata innititur meritis Christi, & per ease credit & sperat saluari, ip∣se enim meruit nobis à peccatis & á diabolo liberationem, vitae iustificationem & glorificationem, vt in omnibus honorificetur Deus. 3 Ostendit idem Esaias, facti sumus vt immundi omnes nos, & quasi pannus menstruatae vniuersae iustitiae nostrae; Quae ergo proportio nostrorum bonorum operum, quae tam erunt judici abominabi∣lia, & aeternae beatitudinis, quae tantae pulchritudinis & dulcedinis perfectione abun∣dat?

Anno 1541. In the time of Charles the fifth and by his appointment, there was a conference betweene six learned diuines at Ratisbon, for the conposing of the differences in religion, whereof three were chosen for the Roman, and three for the reformed part; at which conference Cardinall Contarenus was present.

At this conference the collocutors of both sides, agreed in all the poynts that concerne Iustification, composed the differences touching the same, and offe∣red the forme of their agreement to the Emperour and the imperiall states. In this agreement they left out the matter of merit; which when some disliked, & there wanted not in Rome that tooke exception to their so doing; Cardinall Contarenus writeth to Cardinall Farnesius, and sheweth at large, that there is no merit properly so named, out of the grounds of Philosophie and Divinitie. And strongly proueth, that there is no merit of eternall life; because if there bee, then either men merit it before or after Iustification, not before, then eni∣mies &c: not after, because to merit is to make that due that was not due be∣fore, whereas the happines of eternall life is due to the iustified, by the right of his iustification, so that the workes of the iustified doe not make the same newly due.

CHAP. 13.

Of workes of Supererogation and counsailes of perfection.

THe Papists imagine certaine degrees of morall goodnesse: the lowest whereof, who so attayneth not, doeth sinne, as not doing that the precept requireth; the higher, such as men are counselled vnto, if they will bee perfect, though not by any precept vrged therevnto; they that attaine to such height of vertue, are sayd by them to doe workes of superero∣gation. But a 1.577 Gerson sheweth, that these men erre, in that they discerne not be∣tweene the matter of precepts and counsailes, imagining that the precept re∣quireth the inferiour degrees of vertue, and the counsailes the more high and excellent: whereas the precept requireth all the actions of vertue in the best sort they can bee performed, and the counsailes are conversant in another mat∣ter, namely, in shewing vs the meanes whereby most easily, if all things bee answerable in the parties, men may attaine to the height of vertue. Herevnto agreeth b 1.578 Iansenius, alleaging the authority of Aquinas, secundâ secundae quaest. 184. Artic. 3. who affirmeth that the perfection of Christian life, consisteth essentially in keeping the commaundements: and of another, who sayth, that watchings, fastings, nakednesse, and forsaking all, are not Christian perfecti∣ons, but the instruments of perfection, not the ends of Christian discipline, but the meanes whereby men doe oftentimes attaine to the height of vertue: so that as Gerson, and c 1.579 Paludanus doe shew, some men at sometime, and in some state of things, may attaine to as great height of perfection, liuing in marriage, and possessing much, as they that liue single, and giue away all they haue: d 1.580 But the conceit of the Iesuites is, that the entring into a Monasticall life, wherein are implied the vowes of single life and voluntary pouerty, is essentially of so great merit, and acceptation with God, that it is a kinde of Baptisme freeing from all temporall punishments otherwise due for precedent sinnes.

CHAP. 14.

Of Election and Reprobation depending on the foresight of something in the parties elected or reiected.

WHy these or these men are predestinated or reprobated, a 1.581 Ari∣minensis saith, some yeeld a positiue reason, to wit, workes, or the well vsing of free will; others, a priuatiue, to wit, the not resisting against grace: against these opinions hee opposeth these conclusions; the first, that no man is predestinated, for that God foresaw hee would vse the liberty of his will aright; the second, that no man is prede∣stinated,

because God foresaw, he would not resist against his grace; the third, that whom God did predestinate, hee did freely, and onely of mercy predesti∣nate them, according to the good pleasure of his will. See the diverse opi∣nions touching Predestination formerly found in the Romane Church, in b 1.582 Ca∣meracensis.

CHAP. 15.

Of the seuen Sacraments.

DVrandus a 1.583 denyeth Matrimony to bee a Sacrament properly so named, and of the same nature with the rest, or to giue grace. b 1.584 Canus sayth, the Divines speake vncertainely of the matter and forme of Matrimo∣ny, and that they doe not certainely resolue, whether it giue grace or not. c 1.585 Alexander of Hales sayth, that there are onely foure, which are in any sort properly to bee said Sacraments of the new Law, that the other three sup∣posed Sacraments had their being long before, but receiued some additi∣on by Christ manifested in the flesh, that amongst them which beganne with the new Covenant, onely Baptisme and the Eucharist were instituted immedi∣atly by Christ, receiued their formes from him, and flowed out of his wounded side: whence it commeth, that water is the matter of Baptisme, and bread and wine of the Eucharist, without any other consecration, but that which they re∣ceiue from the words of Sacramentall forme: but the matter of the other two supposed Sacraments, requireth consecration, and hallowing, before it can bee the matter of those Sacraments, so that though the wordes of forme bee pro∣nounced, they haue no vertue of Sacraments, but from precedent consecration: Whereby it appeareth, that they take their force from the prayers of the Church, by the Ministery whereof they were appointed, and not from the words of forme, as the other doe. Hence also it commeth, that they are vari∣able both in their matter and forme. The Apostles, sayth Alexander of Hales, confirmed with the onely imposition of their hands without any certain forme of wordes or outward matter or Element, but afterward it was otherwise or∣dayned, both in respect of the one, and the other: the formes of Baptisme, and the Eucharist being appoynted by Christ, are kept inviolably without all change: but touching the wordes of forme to be vsed in any other of the sup∣posed Sacraments, there is no certainty, but they are diversly and doubtfully desiuered. The reason whereof is, because they are of humane devising. By this which hath beene sayd, it may appeare, that the other pretended Sacraments are not of the same nature with Baptisme and the Eucharist, as euen d 1.586 Bellarmin himselfe is forced to confesse: the sacred or holy things, sayth he, which the Sa∣craments of the new Law signifie, are threefold; the grace of Iustification, the Passion of Christ, and eternall life, as Thomas teacheth; touching Baptisme, and the Eucharist, the thing is most evident, concerning the other it is not so certaine.

CHAP. 16.

Of the being of one body in many places at the same time.

THE possibility of the being of one body in many places at the same time, was euer denyed by many worthy members of the Church, and consequently the locall presence of Christs Body in the Sacrament, whether definitiue, or circumscriptiue, was likewise reiected, as a thing impossible. To affirme, sayth a 1.587 Aquinas, that one body may be locally in this place, and yet also in another at the same time, implyeth a contradiction:

and therefore the power of God extendeth not to the effecting of any such thing. b 1.588 Scotus confesseth, that Egidius, Godfredus de font, Alanus, and Henri∣cus, are of the same opinion with Thomas. c 1.589 Durandus sayth, that which is pre∣sent in one place definitiuely or circumscriptiuely, cannot in any such sort be in many places at the same time. Whervpon he pronounceth, that the body of Christ is no otherwise in the Sacrament, but by reason of a certaine habitudina∣ry vnion betweene it, and the sacramentall elements: whence it was wont to be sayd, that Christs body is personaliter in verbo, localiter in coelo, sacramentaliter in Eucharistia: Personally in the eternall word, locally in heauen, sacramentally in the Eucharist. The first that taught otherwise, and brought in the locall presence, was Scotus, whom d 1.590 Occam followed, though he deny not, but the former opi∣nion had great fauourers.

CHAP: 17.

Of Transubstantiation.

THe conuersion of the bread and wine into Christs body and blood, all of us, sayth a 1.591 Caietane, do teach in words, but in deede many deny it, thinking nothing lesse. These are diuersly diuided one from ano∣ther: for some by the Conuersion that is in the sacrament, vnderstand nothing but Indentity of place, that is, that the bread is therefore sayd to be made the body of Christ, because where the bread is, the body of Christ be∣comes present also; others vnderstand by the word Conuersion, nothing else but the order of succession, that is, that the body succeedeth, and is vnder the vailes of those accidents, vnder which the bread, which they thinke to be annihilated, was before. This opinion in substance Scotus followeth, though in the maner of his speech he seemeth to decline it. Some admit both the word and thing, but yet not wholy, but only in part, as Durandus. b 1.592 Bonauentura sayth, that some seeing the accidents to remaine both in their being and operation, thinke the matter of the sacramentall element still remaineth; Other, the forme; but that the more Catholike or generall opinion is, that the whole substance of the ele∣ments is turned into Christs body and blood. We see, he maketh the doctrine of Transubstantiation to be but an opinion. c 1.593 Occam sayth, there are three opi∣nions of Transubstantiation, of which, the first supposeth a couersion of the sa∣cramentall elements; the second an annihilation; the third affirmeth the bread to be in such sort transubstantiated into the body of Christ, that it is no way changed in substance, or substantially cōuerted into Christs body, or doth cease to bee, but onely that the body of Christ in euery part of it becomes present in euery part of the bread. This opinion he sayth, the Master of sentences men∣tioneth, not much disliking it; yet is it not commonly holden. d 1.594 Cameracensis sayth, that the more common opinion is, that the substance of bread doth not re∣maine, but wholly ceaseth; and that though this opinion be not euidently dedu∣ced from the scriptures, nor concluded out of any determination of the vniuer∣sall Church for ought he can see, yet he is resolued to follow it. e 1.595 Waldensis sayth, hee found in a certaine old booke of decrees, that in the yeare 1049. there was a meeting of Archbishops, Bishoppes, and other religious per∣sons in a Synode, and that when they were come together, they beganne to speake of the body and bloud of Christ, some saying one thing, some ano∣ther; but that before the third day of meeting, they that denyed the sub∣stantiall conuersion of the sacramentall elements, were silent. f 1.596 But in the same booke he reporteth out of Christopolitanus Zacharias, his booke intitu∣led Quatuor vnum, that there were some, perhaps many, but hardly to be discerned and noted, that thought still, as Berengarius did, whom they then condemned, and yet condemned him with the rest, in this respect onely

disliking him, for that refusing the forme of wordes the Church vsed, with the nakednesse of his maner of speaking, hee gaue offence, not following the vse of the Scriptures, which every where call things that are signes, by the names of things signifyed, especially in the matter of Sacraments, the more liuely to ex∣presse their vertue and efficacie: these men ceased not to charge others secretly, that they knew not the nature of figuratiue speaches, & therefore not without grosse errour, killing the soule, tooke signes for the things, whereof they are signes; scorning not a little the folly, of them that say, the appearing accidents of bread and wine after the conuersion, doe hang in the ayre, or that the senses are deceiued. In the same place he sayth, that Guitmundus reporteth some o∣ther that were not of the faction of Berengarius, but with great vehementie, contrary and opposite vnto him, to haue beene of opinion, that the bread and wine in part are changed, and in part remaine; these supposed so much onely to bee changed, as is to serue for the communicating of the worthy receiuers: o∣thers thought the whole to be changed, but that when vnworthy men come to communicate, the body and blood of Christ cease to bee present, and the sub∣stances of bread and wine returne, and are there present to be receiued by them. But that it may yet more clearely appeare, that the opinion of Transubstantia∣tion neuer passed currantly in the Church, let vs adde another testimony of the same Waldensis, g 1.597 who sayth, that some supposed the conuersion that is in the Sacrament, to bee in that the bread and wine are assumpted into the vnity of Christs person: some thought it to be by way of Impanation: and some by way of figuratiue or Tropicall appellation. The first and second of these opinions, found the better entertainment in some mens mindes, because they graunt the essentiall presence of Christs body, and yet deny not the presence of the bread still remayning to sustaine the appearing accidents. These opinions hee re∣ports to haue beene very acceptable to many, not without sighes, wishing the Church had decreed, that men should follow one of them; Wherevpon Iohn Paris writeth, that this way of Impanation so pleased Guido the Carmelite, sometimes Reader of the holy Palace, that hee professed, if hee had beene Pope, hee would haue prescribed and commaunded the imbracing of it. Neither was it lesse pleasing to many in Waldensis time, who, as hee sayth, did as it were wish in their hearts, it were free from them to defend it, and that a decree in the Church were passed in the favour of it.

CHAP. 18.

Touching or all Manducation.

ALexander a 1.598 of Hales, and b 1.599 Bonaventura doe teach, that no man can eate the flesh of Christ, and drinke his blood, without faith: and that the ea∣ting of Christ is mysticall, not corporall, Bonaventura sheweth; for that whereas there are three things implied in corporall eating, to wit, a mastication or chewing, a traiection into the stomacke and bellie, and a conversion of the thing eaten into the substance of the eater; this later, which is most essentiall in eating, cannot agree vnto the body of Christ, which is not turned into our substance, but rather in mysticall sort turneth vs into it selfe. It appeareth by that of Waldensis cited before, that many thought, the wicked doe not eate the flesh of Christ, seeing they supposed so much onely of the bread to be turned into the body of Christ, as is to be receiued by the beleeuers; or if all bee turned, that yet the body of Christ ceaseth to be in the Sacrament, when a wicked man is to receiue it, and that the bread returneth againe.

CHAP. 19.

Of the reall sacrificing of Christs body on the Altar, as a propitiatory sa∣crifice for the quicke and dead.

TOuching the reall sacrificing of Christs Body on the Altar, the Church neuer taught any such thing, as the Romanists now teach, as appeareth by these testimonyes following. Although, sayth a 1.600 Biel, Christ were once offered, when he appeared in our flesh, he is offred notwith∣standing dayly hidden vnder the vailes of Bread & wine, not touching any of those things which import punishment or suffering (for Christ is not dayly wounded, he suffereth not, he dyeth not) but for two other causes, the conse∣cration and receiuing of the holy Eucharist, may be named a sacrifice & oblati∣on: first, because it is a representation and memoriall of the true sacrifice & ho∣ly oblation made on the Altar of the Crosse; secondly, because it maketh vs par∣takers of the effects of the same: now the resemblances of things, as Augustine noteth, writing to Simplicianus, are called by the names of those things where∣of they are resemblances, as we are wont to say, when we behold a paynted ta∣ble or wall, this is Cicero, this Salustius. Wherefore seeing the celebration of this sacrifice is a liuely resemblance of the Passion of Christ, which is the true sacrificing of him, it may rightly bee named the sacrificing of him. Pe∣ter Lombard, Thomas, and the other Schoolemen, sayth b 1.601 Bellarmine, were not carefull of that, which is now in question, touching the dayly re∣newed Reall sacrificing of Christ, but only sought to shew how the sacrifice of the Masse, may be called an offering of Christ, that is, a slaying of him; & there∣fore proposing the question, whether the Eucharist be a sacrifice, they answer, for the most part, that it may be sayde to bee an offering or sacrifice, because it hath a resemblance of the true and Reall offering which was on the Altar of the Crosse, and because it communicateth vnto vs the effects of the true and Reall killing of Christ.

CHAP. XX.

Of Remission of sinnes after this life.

THat Remission of sinnes after this life was not taught, nor beleeued in former times by the Church, appeareth by the judgement of these Di∣vines who teach the contrary. The prayers of the liuing, sayth a 1.602 Duran∣dus, may be vnderstood to benefit the dead two wayes: either in re∣spect of remitting the fault, or diminishing or taking away the punishment: in the first sort, the prayers of the liuing cannot profit the dead, because either the sin, wherein they depart out of this life, is mortall, or veniall; if it be mortall, hee that so departeth is not capable of Remission: if veniall, he needes no helpe, be∣cause such remission of sinne consisteth in the ordering the will aright againe, whereby men rightly dislike, that they ill affected before: now the willes of them that depart hence in grace, & yet with veniall sinne, so soone as they are out of the body, are brought into due order, because, as weight and lightnesse, carry the things that are heavy or light, if there be no impediment, to their owne places; so Grace and Charity carry men going hence, to the possessing of eternall happinesse, so that all things hindering or staying, from the present enjoying thereof, are bitter and vnpleasant. Now because not onely punish∣ments for mortall sinnes formerly committed, but also veniall sinnes, if any bee found in him that dyeth in state of grace, hinder from such desired enjoying, therefore they must needes bee disliked: in which dislike, the will is reorde∣red againe, which in the liking of that it should not, was disordered, &c. The merites, sayth b 1.603 Scotus, of him that dyeth in charity, are a sufficient

cause of the remission of veniall sinnes, neither is this cause hindred from wor∣king the proper effect thereof, in him that dyeth, as it often is, in him that li∣ueth; for in him that liueth, there is a stop and hindrance, so long as hee remai∣neth actually in sinne; but after death there is no stop, because then a man com∣mitteth no sinne, and therefore by such merits sinnes are remitted: Whence it followeth, that in the instant of death, all veniall sinnes are remitted, to men dy∣ing in state of grace. c 1.604 Alexander of Hales maketh grace to be of three sorts; the first, that which is giuen in baptisme; the second, that which is found in men repenting of sinne committed after Baptisme; and the third, that which is in men departing hence, which he calleth finall grace: this last, he saith, taketh a∣way all sinfullnesse out of the soule, because when the soule parteth from the body, all pronenesse to ill, and all perturbations which were found in it, by reason of the conjunction with the flesh, do cease, the powers thereof are quie∣ted, and perfectly subjected to grace, and by that meanes all veniall sinnes re∣mooued: soe that no veniall sinne is remitted after this life, but in that instant, wherein grace may be sayd to be finall grace, it hath full dominion and absolute command, and expelleth all sinne. Whereas therefore, the Master of sentences, and others do say, that some veniall sinnes are remitted after this life, we must soe vnderstand their sayings, that therefore they are sayd to be remitted after this life, because it being the same moment or instant, that doth continuate the time of life, and that after life, (so that the last instant of life, is the first af∣ter life) they being remitted and taken away in the very moment of dissoluti∣on, are sayd to be remitted after this life: for otherwise, the wills of men after death are vnchangeable, and there is no more place left for merit. Hereunto d 1.605 Gregory seemeth to agree, saying, that the very feare that is found in men dying, doth purge their soules going out of their body, from the lesser sinnes. Seeing therefore, as e 1.606 Bernard sayth, if all sinne be perfectly taken away, whi•…•… is the cause, the effect must needes cease, which is punishment: it followeth, that see∣ing after death, there is no sinne found in men dying in state of grace, there re∣maineth no punishment, and consequently no purgatory.

CHAP. 21.

Of Purgatory.

TOuching Purgatory, a 1.607 whether they, that are to be purged, be purged by materiall fire, or by some other meanes, it is doubtfull: likewise b 1.608 touching the place, the Roman Church hath defined nothing. Whereupon some thinke, that soules are purged, where they sinned, some in one place, some in another: neither is there any more certainty c 1.609 tou∣ching the continuance of sinfull soules in their purgation. d 1.610 Dominicus â Soto thinketh, that no man continueth in this purgation ten yeares: his reason is, for that seeing, men may pacifie Gods wrath, by very short penance in this life, where they can neither endure any great extremity, nor are perfectly apprehen∣siue of smart & griefe, therefore much sooner in the other, where they may en∣dure greater extremity, and are more apprehensiue of it; so that the extremity of their passion, may counteruaile long continuance in paine. This of Soto, if we grant to be true, saith Bellarmine, no soule needes stay in purging one houre: nei∣ther indeed cā he proue, that any doth, by Scripture, or Fathers, or any resolutiō of the Church, but only because they vse to pray for men departed a long time after their death; which doth no more proue, that they neede prayers so long as they are prayed for, then pardons for thousands of yeares proue Purgatory to continue so long; and by certaine visions, which sometimes e 1.611 he regardeth not. For howsoeuer sundry visions reported by Beda, Dionysius Carthusianus, and in

the first booke of the life of Bernard import, that the soules of men in Purgato∣rie are tormented by diuels, yet he thinketh that the children of God, ouercom∣ming Satan in the last conflict, & being secure of their future state for euer, are neuer molested by Satan any more. Thus then we see, that notwithst•…•…ding any thing defined in the Church, the soules of men may be purged from all the drosse of sinnefull remainders, and freed from all punishments, in the very mo∣ment of dissolution, which is that wee say. Hereupon f 1.612 Iohn Bacon sayth, there be some, who thinke that Purgatory after this life cannot be prooued by the au∣thority of the Scripture, & that these do say, the bookes of Macchabees are not Canonicall, and that the Apostle, 1. Cor. 3. speaketh of that fire, that shall purge the elements of the world, in the last day: And touching that saying of Christ, of sinne, that shall neuer be remitted in this world, nor that to come, they say it proo∣ueth not the remission of any sinnes in the other world, but that this forme of speaking is vsed, only for the better inforcing of that he intendeth to deliuer; as if a man should say to a barren woman, thou shalt neuer beare child, neither in this world nor in that which is to come.

CHAP. 22.

Of the Saints hearing of our prayers.

THat the Saints doe heare our prayers, or are acquainted with our par∣ticular wants, was neuer resolued in the Church of God. a 1.613 Biel sayth, that the Saints by that naturall, or euening knowledge, whereby they see and know things, as they are in themselues, do not know or discern our prayers, neither mentall nor vocall, by reason of the immoderate distance betweene them and vs: and touching that morning knowledge, whereby they see things in the eternall word, it no way pertaining to their essentiall felicity, to see and know our desires, and it being vncertaine, whether it appertaine to their accidentall happinesse, hee sayth, it is not certaine, but that it may seeme probable, that God revealeth vnto them all those suites, which men present vn∣to them. The b 1.614 Master of sentences sayth, it is not incredible, that the soules of the Saints, that delight in the secrets of Gods countinance, in beholding the same, see things that are done in the world below. c 1.615 Hugo de Sancto Victore leaueth it doubtfull whether the Saints do heare our prayers or not, and reje∣cteth that saying of Gregory, brought to proue that they do, Qui videt videntem omnia, videt omnia. The interlineall glosse vpon Esay 63. sayth Augustine, was of opinion, that the dead, though Saints, know not what the liuing, though they be their owne children, doe here in this world. Which appeareth to be true by his owne words, pronouncing, that if so great Patriarkes as was Abraham, knew not what befell to the people that came of them, it is no way likely that the dead, do intermeddle with the affaires of the liuing, either to know them, or to further, and set them forward: whereupon he concludes, that, for ought is knowne to the contrary, the Saints remaining only in heauen, and praying for vs only in generall, God by the ministery of Angels, or immediately by him∣selfe, without their particular intermedling, giueth vs the things we haue need of. d 1.616 Willihelmus Altisiodorensis sayth, that many do thinke, that neither wee do properly pray to the Saints, nor they pray for vs in particular, but that impro∣perly only we may be sayd to pray to them, in that wee desire God that the fa∣uour which they finde with him, resting from their labours, and their workes being gone after them, may procure vs their brethren, acceptation likewise, whom they haue left behind them in the warfare of this world. Whereupon the prayers are, Adiuuent nos eorum merita &c. In the margent he sayth, that this was a common opinion in his time.

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

CHAP. 23.

Of the Superstition and Idolatry committed formerly in the worshipping of Images.

THat many in the Romane Church did see the abuse & superstition, that was in the vse of Images, appeareth by Picus Mirand. his Apology of his conclusion proposed in Rome, that neither the Crosse, nor any other image is to be worshipped with diuine worship; by a 1.617 Durand. blaming many things in the practise of the Church at that time, and by b 1.618 Gerson, disliking the honour then giuen to Images, their number and fashion, as being occasions of Idolatry in the simple; which to be true, the words of c 1.619 Augustine are proof sufficient, who demaundeth who it is, or where he may bee found, that adoreth or prayeth, beholding an Image, as the manner was in the Romane Church, & is not in such sort affected, that he perswadeth himselfe it heareth him, and is able and ready to grant him the things he desireth, and seeketh in his prayer.

CHAP. 24.

Of Absolution.

ABsolution is now supposed by those of the Church of Rome, to be a Sa∣cramentall Acte, giuing grace, ex opere operato, and so remitting sinne, both quoad culpam & poenam: but in the Primitiue Church it was no∣thing else, but a restoring of men formerly put from the Sacrament, & cast out of the Church, to the Churches peace, and vse of the Sacraments again; as appeareth by Cyprians Epistles. Neither was Absolution giuen in those times till pennance were first performed. Amongst the ancient, sayth a 1.620 Lindan, Abso∣lution was seldome giuen, but after penance performed; onely in time of perse∣cution, pestilence, warre, or dangerous sicknesse of the party, the manner was, sometimes to giue absolution presently at the suit of the penitent, & to require of him the performance of pennance afterward, if hee escaped those dangers. Hence in time it came, that ordinarily, they gaue Absolution first, and then im∣posed penance to be performed afterward, Now because they could not con∣ceiue, from what this Absolution should free them, not being formerly subje∣cted to any censure of the Church, some began to thinke, that it freeth them from the staine of sinne, and the punishments due vnto the same, thereby ma∣king it a Sacramentall Acte, yet so, as many retayned a right perswasion still. The Priest, saith b 1.621 Alexander of Hales, is a Mediatour betweene God & man: to God he ascendeth, as an inferiour, by way of petition, and as a suiter; to man he descendeth, as a Commaunder and Iudge. In the first sort, hee obtayneth for men, by his prayer, and procureth acceptation with God: in the second, hee reconcileth them to the Church, his prayer obtayneth grace, his absolution presupposeth it, so that the Keyes of the Church extend to the remission of sin, by way of request obtayning it, not by way of authority giuing it.

CHAP. 25.

Of Indulgences and Pardons.

TOuching Indulgences or Pardons; they were originally nothing else, but the releasing of some part of that penance, that had beene enioy∣ned, as appeareth by the whole course of antiquity. Wherevpon it was a long time, the opinion of many in the Romane Church, that In∣dulgences are of force, onely in indicio Ecclesiae, not in iudicio Dei: and that they free men only from injoyned penance, which the forme of them was wont to import, it being euer added in those relaxations, ab iniunctis poenitentiis; and a 1.622 Caietan sheweth the same, affirming, that an Indulgence is principally an acte of jurisdiction, and the freeing from enjoyned penance. That which bred ano∣ther conceit in the Romane Church in later times, was an errour in practise: for whereas aunciently they neuer remitted any part of the penance they had enjoyned, but out of the consideration of the extraordinary signes of repen∣tance, appearing in the penitent, arguing that to bee performed in shorter time, than was expected, which was intended; in later times they granted these rela∣xations and remissions in favour, when there was no inducement, in respect of any thing, appearing in the parties. Now because to free them from these pe∣nitentiall exercises, tending to the preventing of Gods Iudgements, before so much was performed, as was necessary for the turning away of his displeasure, might seeme hurtfull, rather than beneficiall to them, to whom such favours were shewed, in that they were left to Gods judgements, into whose hands it is fearefull to fall, they began to bethinke them, how they might supply the defects of penitentiall conversion vnto God, in those they thus pardoned, and not leaue them to the danger of his future judgement. This they could not o∣therwise devise to doe, but by casting the ouerplus of other mens satisfactions vpon them, and releeuing them out of the treasury of the Church: which grow∣eth, as they suppose, out of the satisfactorie sufferings of Christ and his Saints, multis tamen doctoribus aduersantibus, as b 1.623 Caietan noteth; where hee sheweth, that Durandus teacheth, that the Saints had no superfluous merits, not rewar∣ded in themselues. Touching Indulgences, c 1.624 Durandus sayth, little can bee sayd of any certainety, or as vndoubtedly true, seeing the Scripture speaketh not expresly of them, neither the Fathers, as Augustine, Hillarie, Ambrose, Hierome, and the rest; so that in speaking of them, wee must follow the com∣mon course. Touching the force of these pardons, how vncertainly and vn∣constantly their greatest doctours dispute, it is not vnknowne; for Bonaventu∣ra noteth, that many were of opinion, that pardons haue no other vse, nor haue any further force or vertue, but onely to remit certaine dayes penance, if the cause, in respect whereof they be granted, bee equivalent vnto the penance, which was to haue beene performed; so making them to bee, but onely a com∣mutation of penance, and not a relaxation or remission. d 1.625 Gerson sayth, the judiciall and publike power of the keyes extendeth not it selfe principally, or directly, to the diminishing or taking away of any punishments, but such, as it selfe inflicted, or might haue inflicted, as are the punishments of Excommuni∣cation, irregularity, and other disablings to performe Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall actes. And in e 1.626 another place he sayth, the granting of Indulgences extendeth not it selfe to punishments, following the corruption of nature, and flowing from originall sinne; for it is certaine that the Pope doeth not absolue, and free men from thirst, hunger, infirmities and death; so that such absolutions extend only to the punishments aboue mētioned, & such as may be inflicted by the just Iudgment and prescription of him that imposeth penance for actuall sins. Whe ther the power of the Keyes extend only, to such as are on earth, or to them also

that are in Purgatory, the opinions, hee sayth, of men are contrary & vncertaine: f 1.627 but howsoeuer, this he pronounceth confidently, that onely Christ can giue such pardons for thousands of dayes and yeares as many Popes assume to them∣selues power to graunt.

CHAP. 26.

Of the Infallibility of the Popes judgment.

TOuching the infallibility of the Popes judgment: it was so farre from being a thing resolued of in the Church of God before our time, that a 1.628 Stapleton confesseth, it is yet no matter of faith, but of opinion onely; because so many famous and renowned Deuines, haue euer holden the contrary, as Gerson, Almaine, Occam, allmost all the Parisians, all they that thought the councell to be aboue the Pope, Adrianus Sextus, Durandus, Alfon∣sus à Castro: and many moe.

CHAP. 27.

Of the power of the Pope, in disposing the affaires of Princes and their states.

LAstly, Touching the power of the Pope, in disposing the affaires of Princes & their States, there were euer many worthy men, that opposed themselues against his vnjust and Antichristian claimes. There are some sayth a 1.629 Waldensis, that erre, supposing, that the roote of all terrene power, dependeth in such sort of the Pope, that it is deriued vnto Princes, by commis∣sion from him; and that if they abuse the same, hee may take the disposing of such affaires as belong vnto them, into his own hands. This they indeauour to proue, because the Ecclesiasticall power is more eminent and excellent than the power of Princes; but this their proofe is too weake: for let vt runne through all examples of things which are different in degree of excellencie, and one of them more worthy than another, wee shall see that the Sunne is better than the Moone, yet the power and vertue of moystening that is in the Moone, is not imparted to it from the Sunne; the soule is more excellent than the body: yet the body was before the soule came into it, and in it many workes of sense are per∣formed, which the spirit by it selfe cannot performe; gold is better then leade, yet doth it not giue being vnto it: so that though it were granted, that Episcopall dignity is more high and eminent then the authority of Princes, yet the first spring of Regall power, is in the King from God, and not from the Pope. There is, sayth Waldensis, one doctor Adam, a Cardinall, who in a dialogue betweene a Bishoppe and a King, indeauoureth altogether to deriue the au∣thority of Kings from the Papall power, both in the being and excercise of it, and reserueth onely a power of execution to Princes, at the com∣maund of the high bishop: this errour hee condemneth, and sayth, that how∣soeuer the solemnities of the oath, vnction, crowning, and the like are performed to Kings by Bishoppes, yet hath not kingly dignity her beginning from Priesthood, but by the ministery of Priests, Kings receiue it from God, and are put in possession of it. Fawning and deceitfull flattery, sayth b 1.630 Gerson, whis∣pereth in the eares of Ecclesiasticall persons, especially of the Pope, in shame∣lesse manner saying vnto them, O sacred Clergie, how great, how great is the height and sublimity of thy Ecclesiasticall power! how is all secular authori∣ty, compared thereunto, altogether nothing! For as all power in heauen and earth was giuen to Christ, soe Christ left it all to Peter, and his Successours: soe that Constantine the Emperour gaue nothing to Pope Syluester, that was not

his before, but onely restored that which had bin vnjustly detayned: besides, as there is no power but of God, so is there none, whether Temporall or Ecclesi∣asticall, Imperiall or Regall but from the Pope, in whose thigh CHRIST hath written, King of Kings, and Lord of Lords: of whose power to dispute, is sa∣crilegious boldnesse, to whom no man may say, Sir, why doe you so? though he alter, over-turne, waste and confound all States, Rules, Dominions, and Possessi∣ons of men, whether Ciuill, or Ecclesiasticall; let me be judged a Lyar, saith he, if these things bee not found written, by them that seeme wise in their owne eyes, and if some Popes haue not giuen credit to such lying and flattering wordes. Nay, I am greatly deceiued, if before the holding of the sacred Sy∣node of Constance, this tradition did not so farre forth possesse the mindes of very many men, rather literall then literate, that whosoeuer should haue taught the contrary, should haue beene noted and condemned for heresie.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Art. 24. p. 213
• b 1.2

  Rhen. annot. in Tertull. de corona militis.
• c 1.3

  Rational di∣v•…•…. l 4. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1.
• * 1.4

  d Durand. ra∣tional 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉.
• * 1.5

  〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉
• f 1.6

  Archiep. To∣let. lib. 6. c. 25. & 26.
• * 1.7

  All that follow∣eth after the Lords prayer, and that imme∣diatly it is named Embolismus, as added af∣terwards.
• g 1.8

  〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉. 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉
• h 1.9

  De optimo •…•…nere inter∣•…•…. 3. 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 2. 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉
• i 1.10

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• k 1.11

  Rational. l. 4. 53.
• * 1.12

  Lombardus l. 4. d. 12. saltem ter in anno homines com∣municent.
• l 1.13

  56.
• m 1.14

  In canonem.
• n 1.15

  l. 4. c. 1.
• o 1.16

  De rebus Eccles. cap. 22.
• p 1.17

  Homil. 3.
• q 1.18

  Durand. rati∣onal. li. 4. 54.
• r 1.19

  Cassa. consult pag 238. ar. 24.
• * 1.20

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Citat à Cassan. Ibidem pag. 220.
• t 1.21

  Epist. ad cle∣•…•…um l•…•…ratos{que} Bohem. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Cap 25.
• * 1.22

  x Cap. 58.
• y 1.23

  Durand. lib. 4. 53.
• * 1.24

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• z 1.25

  Pag. 492.
• a 1.26

  Lib. 4. c. 55.
• * 1.27

  b In Prov. c. 9.
• * 1.28

  c •…•…n 1. Cor. cap. 11.
• d 1.29

  Ad Phila∣delph.
• * 1.30

  e Const•…•…. l. b. 2. c. 61.
• * 1.31

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Hieratch. cc•…•…. cap 3 p. 3.
• g 1.32

  Ad vvo•…•…em l. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 c. •…•…6.
• h 1.33

  Epist. •…•…4.
• i 1.34

  S•…•…m. de laps.
• k 1.35

  in Numer. homil. 16.
• * 1.36

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Ambros. de Sacram. l. 4. c 6
• m 1.37

  Amb•…•…os. l. 1. off•…•…. c. 41.
• n 1.38

  Cap. 3.
• o 1.39

  Aug. in sent. Pr•…•…. & de consecred. 2. c. cum frangitur.
• * 1.40

  •…•…rat. 40. in sanct baptisma.
• * 1.41

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Ca•…•…hes. mystag•…•….
• r 1.42

  Hom•…•…. 1 8. in 2 Co•…•….
• * 1.43

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 l. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c.
• * 1.44

  〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. 23.
• * 1.45

  Citat. à Cas∣sand. liturg. c. 31.
• u 1.46

  Inter homi∣lias hiemales de sanctis tom. 7. p. •…•…20.
• y 1.47

  De imag. l. 4. c. 14
• * 1.48

  x Apud Bini∣um.
• * 1.49

  z De institut. cler. l. 1. c 3.
• * 1.50

  a De corpore & sanguine Dom. c. 15.
• b 1.51

  De diuinis officijs, l. 2. c 9.
• c 1.52

  1 Cor. 10.
• d 1.53

  De eucharist.
• e 1.54

  De sacramen∣to. l. 2. c. 3.
• * 1.55

  f In tertiam Aquin. 80. q. art 12.
• g 1.56

  Citat à Cas∣sandro liturg. cap. 31.
• h 1.57

  Aphorism. de eucharist. l. 6. p. 231.
• i 1.58

  In Tertul. de coronâ mil.
• * 1.59

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 De commu∣nione sub vtra∣que specie.
• l 1.60

  Serm. de qua∣d•…•…ag. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• m 1.61

  Cano. Com∣perimus de consec, dist. 2.
• n 1.62

  Serm. de laps.
• o 1.63

  De promiss. Dei dimid. temporis. c. 6
• p 1.64

  Apud Ivonem decret. part. 2. cap, 19.
• q 1.65

  Ex institutis Cluniacensium l. 2. c. 35. de sa∣cerdote hebdo∣madario apud Cassand. litur∣gic. c. 31.
• r 1.66

  Apud Cas∣sand, ibid.
• s 1.67

  Cap. 19.
• t 1.68

  Can. 1.
• u 1.69

  Epist. 64.
• x 1.70

  Rational. div. l 4. c. 42.
• y 1.71

  Quartâ parte lum. q. 32. memb. 1. ar. 2.
• z 1.72

  q. 53.
• a 1.73

  q. 31.
• b 1.74

  In 4 sent. d. 8. ar. 13.
• c 1.75

  In 4. d. 11. ar. 1.
• d 1.76

  In 4. sent. d. 8. part. 2. art. 2. q. 2.
• e 1.77

  tertia part. q. 80. ar. 12.
• f 1.78

  P. 4. q. 31. memb. 1.
• g 1.79

  Lib 4. d. 11. q. 1.
• h 1.80

  Citat. à Cas∣sand. Liturg. c. 31.
• i 1.81

  De summa trinitate & fide Catholica.
• * 1.82

  Citat. à Cas∣san. in li. de communione sub utraque.
• l 1.83

  Lib. de sacr. tom. 2. c. 88.
• m 1.84

  Cap. 94.
• * 1.85

  n De comm. sub utraque fol. 33.
• o 1.86

  in•…•…. q. 80. art. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• p 1.87

  Apud Gol∣dast. imperial. constitut. tom. 2. 377.
• q 1.88

  Apud Col∣dast. vbi supra pag. 399.
• r 1.89

  Ibid. pag. 381.
• * 1.90

  Trident. con∣cil. quaedam membra avu•…•…a edit ab Arnoldo Birkmanno Coloniae anno 1565.
• s 1.91

  Apud Gold. vbi sup. 399.
• t 1.92

  lib. •…•…6. anno. 15•…•…5.
• * 1.93

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. l. 3•…•…. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• x 1.94

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• y 1.95

  Consult. pag. 242.
• z 1.96

  Odo Cama∣racen•…•…: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 can. exposit. in bibliotheca pat. tom. 6. p. 468. Stephan. Eduensis Epis. de sacram. al∣taris ibid. pag. 491.
• * 1.97

  a Bellar de mi•…•…. l. 2. c. 4.
• * 1.98

  b Quodli. 2•…•….
• c 1.99

  Cap. 34.
• * 1.100

  d De Miss. l. 2. c. 4
• e 1.101

  Epist. ad Cae∣•…•…ilianum.
• f 1.102

  pag. 68.
• g 1.103

  In cant. serm. 22.
• h 1.104

  Serm. 1. de E∣pi•…•…h.
• i 1.105

  Paulo post.
• k 1.106

  pag. 66.
• l 1.107

  pag. 88. & 89.
• m 1.108

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Cae∣sare proposit. ad rationem concordiae in∣cundam in controversiis religionis artic. 1 9. apud Gol∣dast. imperiali∣um constitu∣tionum tom. 2. pag. 1•…•…7.
• n 1.109

  Hosius Tom: 〈◊〉〈◊〉. cap. 41. pag. •…•…4.
• * 1.110

  Merspurg•…•…n∣sis de mis•…•…ae sa 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sermon. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Christum •…•…n 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…dendo off•…•…mus Deo sed 〈◊〉〈◊〉 mysterio & spi•…•…ali rati∣one.
• o 1.111

  Sermon. 12.
• * 1.112

  Greg. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. •…•…7.
• * 1.113

  〈◊◊◊◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊◊◊◊〉.
• * 1.114

  Chrys. in Act. hom. 3.
• * 1.115

  Cyprian. serm. de Coena.
• * 1.116

  Bern. in Cant. serm. 22.
• * 1.117

  Psal. 115.
• * 1.118

  Aug. in Psal. 75
• p 1.119

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• q 1.120

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.121

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• * 1.122

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉.
• t 1.123

  Epistolâ 1. contra Petro∣busianos.
• u 1.124

  De Sacram. l. 1. c. 16.
• x 1.125

  Lib. 4. dist. 12.
• y 1.126

  Li 4. d. 12.
• z 1.127

  Cap. 10.
• a 1.128

  Hebrae. 10.
• b 1.129

  In 4 sent. d. 12
• c 1.130

  In Hebrae. 10.
• d 1.131

  De missa l. 1. cap. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• e 1.132

  De missa ca∣non. 3.
• f 1.133

  Apud Gold. imperialium constitutio∣num. Tom. 2. pag. 332. c. 12.
• g 1.134

  apud Gold. ibid. pag. 376.
• h 1.135

  Exam. part. 3. pag. 92.
• i 1.136

  Ock. com∣pend▪ error. Pa∣pae Ioan. 22. c. 7.
• k 1.137

  Ockam in dialog. p. 2. tract. 2. c. 3.
• l 1.138

  Ribli•…•…thecae tom. 6. p. 228.
• m 1.139

  Cap. 5.
• n 1.140

  Cassand. con∣sult, articulo. 2•…•…
• o 1.141

  In Ps. 50. hom. 2.
• p 1.142

  Citat. a Cas∣sandro Disp. Rati•…•…bonae an. 1546.
• * 1.143

  Rom. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1. 2.
• q 1.144

  Lib. 1. contra Appion.
• b 1.145

  Euseb. lib. 4. c. 25.
• c 1.146

  Lib. 4. 22.
• d 1.147

  Praelect. 14.
• e 1.148

  Lib. 3. c. 10.
• * 1.149

  f Paulo ante annum mundi 4890.
• g 1.150

  Cateche: 4.
• h 1.151

  De mensuris & ponderibus & contra Epi∣cureos, haeresi octauá.
• i 1.152

  Amphilochi∣us ad Seleucum de rectâ •…•…duca∣tione inter o∣pera Nazian∣zeni.
• k 1.153

  De. veris & genuinis scrip∣turae libris pag. 952.
• l 1.154

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 l. 6. c 24. editione grae. Pa. 〈◊〉〈◊〉: c. 25.
• m 1.155

  In Synop•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Scriptu∣rae
• n 1.156

  Canone 59.
• o 1.157

  Canone 2..
• p 1.158

  Orthodoxae fidei •…•… l. 4 c. 18.
• q 1.159

  De sectis scholae actione secunda in Bib∣liotheca 〈◊〉〈◊〉. tom 4.
• r 1.160

  In Prolog. in •…•…almos.
• s 1.161

  In Prologo galeato.
• * 1.162

  Praefat. in Es∣dram & Nehe∣miam ad Dom∣nionem & Ro∣gatianum. Quae non ha∣bentur apud Hebraeos, nec de viginti qua∣tuor senioribus sunt procul abiicienda.
• t 1.163

  Lib. 8. haeres. 12.
• u 1.164

  In Bibl. pat. de haeres. catal. 3. cap. 9.
• x 1.165

  Lib. 2. c. 32. Dan. 13.
• a 1.166

  Contra Ep. Gaudentii, l. 2. c. 23.
• * 1.167

  Luke 24. v. 44.
• b 1.168

  Canon: 2 4
• c 1.169

  Moral: in Iob. l. 19. c. 17.
• d 1.170

  In Hexae∣meron. serm. 19. p. 57.
• e 1.171

  prologo in Iosuam.
• f 1.172

  Prologo in Tobiam.
• g 1.173

  In vlt. Hester. Item praefat. comment ad Clem. 7.
• h 1.174

  Summ: part. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 q. 89. artic. 8.
• i 1.175

  Part: 3. tit. 18. c. 6. paragr. 2.
• k 1.176

  Ibid. paragr 3.
• l 1.177

  Praefat. lib. 14.
• m 1.178

  De 6 aetati∣bus mundi.
• * 1.179

  n Inter opera Aug. tomo. 7.
• o 1.180

  De scripturis & scriptoribus sacris c. 6. item cap. 12.
• * 1.181

  p Exceptio∣num l: 2. c. 9.
• * 1.182

  q De authorit. vete: test am: E∣pistol. contra Petrobrusia∣no•…•….
• * 1.183

  Dialog. part. 3. tract. 1. lib. 3. cap. 16.
• s 1.184

  in quaest. Ar∣men l. 19. c 19.
• t 1.185

  Lib. z. doct. fid. art. 2. c. 22.
• u 1.186

  Praefat. expo∣sit. in Tobiam.
• x 1.187

  Praef. in Mar. quaest. 2.
• a 1.188

  De tradendis discip. l. 5.
• b 1.189

  Comment. in Aug. de civ. dei. l. 18. c. 31.
• c 1.190

  De Eccles. dogm. l. 1. c. ult.
• d 1.191

  Hist Franc. l. 4. c. 1.
• e 1.192

  Bibliothecae, lib. 4.
• f 1.193

  2 prolog. in exposit. suas.
• g 1.194

  Dist. 15 cano∣ne sancta Ro∣man•…•….
• h 1.195

  Dist. 16. cano•…•… canones qui, glossa in ver∣bum apocry∣pha.
• i 1.196

  De Eccles. dogma. l. 1. c. 4.
• a 1.197

  Lib. 1. d. 1. q. 1. artic. 2.
• b 1.198

  Prolog. 1. sent q. 2.
• c 1.199

  Prolog q 3. ad tertiam q.
• d 1.200

  Prolog. l. 2. p. 1. c. 1
• * 1.201

  e Epist. ad Hieron.
• * 1.202

  f De unico baptism.
• g 1.203

  Dialog. l. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 1. cap. 2.
• h 1.204

  Lib. 1. sent. q. 1. EE.
• i 1.205

  Doctrinal. fid. l. 2. art. 2. c. 19.
• * 1.206

  k Sermon: in die circumcisi∣onis domini consid. prim•…•….
• l 1.207

  Part. 6. c. 79.
• m 1.208

  Super Evan∣gel.
• n 1.209

  Part. 4. c. 12.
• o 1.210

  Defens: lib. de officio pij. viri prope princi∣pium.
• p 1.211

  De officio pij viri in princi∣pio.
• q 1.212

  Contr. haeres. cap. 2.
• a 1.213

  Sixtus Se∣nensis biblio sa•…•…ct: l 4. vbi de Chrysostomo loquitur.
• b 1.214

  Lib. 5. de cu randis graeco∣rum affectibus post medium.
• c 1.215

  Diat tib. de linguis Europae
• d 1.216

  Sixtus Senen∣sis bibl. l. 4.
• * 1.217

  e 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 4. c. 27.
• f 1.218

  〈◊〉〈◊〉, Indi, Per∣•…•… •…•…opes, & 〈◊◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊◊〉, &c. Chrysost. hom. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…an.
• g 1.219

  Hier. praefa: in Evangelia.
• h 1.220

  Lib. 5 de cu∣randis Graeco∣rum affect. post medium.
• i 1.221

  Vasaeusin chro. Hisp. ad annum 717.
• k 1.222

  Ioannes Trev. l. 5. c. 24.
• l 1.223

  Aventinus l. 4. annal. p. 434.
• m 1.224

  Sixtus Se∣nensis Biblioth. sanct. l. 4. in Ia∣cobus Archicp. Genuensis.
• * 1.225

  n Preface to the Rhemish Testa∣ment.
• o 1.226

  Controv. 5. q. 3. art. 4. explica∣tione articuli.
• p 1.227

  Preface to the New Testament.
• q 1.228

  Indice lib. pro•…•…b. regulâ 4
• r 1.229

  Observat. in regulam. 4.
• * 1.230

  In Dialog. Anglicanis.
• b 1.231

  Semper hor∣tor & hortari non desinam, vt non hic tan∣tum attenda∣datis ijs quae dicuntur, ve∣rum etiam quum domi fue•…•…s, assidue diuinatum scripturarum lectioni 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.232

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Lectionem diuinarum scripturarum ad solos mona∣chos putatis pertinere cum multo magis vobis quam il∣lis sit necessa∣ria.
• c 1.233

  At nescio in∣quit quae scrip∣to sunt in scrip∣turis. Q•…•…? Nam•…•…n 〈◊〉〈◊〉, num Ro∣man•…•…. num alia lingu•…•… dicta sunt? an non 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dicun∣tur?
• d 1.234

  non solum c•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…tis, sed & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 diui∣nos libros in manus sumite
• e 1.235

  Stapleton vbi supra art. 4. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 fol. •…•…rgu∣menti.
• f 1.236

  Lib. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 799.
• * 1.237

  Anaphora Syror. &c.
• u 1.238

  cap. 9.
• x 1.239

  Aluar. histor. Aethiop. c. 159.
• y 1.240

  Supplement. •…•…ist. lib. 8.
• 1 1.241

  Hist. oriental. cap. 78.
• 2 1.242

  descript. ter∣rae sanctae.
• 3 1.243

  De Sarmatia li. 2 c. 1.
• 4 1.244

  Peregrinat. c. de Armen.
• 5 1.245

  Guagnin. de∣scrip. Moscho∣uiae: cap. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 5 Posseuin. de rebus Mosco∣viticis. p. 4. 5 Sigismund: de rebus Mos∣couiticis. p. 34.
• 6 1.246

  Vitriac. hist. Oriental. c. 76. 7 Osorius de rebus Emanu∣el. l. 3.
• 7 1.247

  Posseuin. ap∣parat. sacr: in Diamperiense concilium.
• 8 1.248

  In biblioth. patrum rom. 6. p. 27.
• a 1.249

  Apud Thom. â Iesu. li. 7. c. 11.
• * 1.250

  * Guido Fa∣britius in his preface before the newe Testament sayth, the He∣brew tongue is diuided into 3. dialects, the Ba∣bilonicall or Chaldaicall: the Syrian, or Hierosolymitan: the Arabique, or tongue of Ismaell as the Iewes call it. The first was the dialect of such Iewes as neuer returned after the captiuity of Babilon, where they had learned a kind of mixt language, the second of such as returned to Ierusalem and brought backe a mixt language, and after their returne by newe mixtures made it farther to degenerate from the originall surity.
• b 1.251

  Confess. l: 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 14.
• c 1.252

  Deverbis A∣post. serm. 26.
• d 1.253

  in vit. Mart. l. 1
• e 1.254

  Ex vetusto manuscript. l. de ordin. lect. Apud Cassand. liturg. c. 26.
• f 1.255

  Pontif. Rom. excus. Venet. 1561. in ordin. Lect.
• g 1.256

  Hist. Hispan. l. 5. c. 4.
• h 1.257

  Isidor. His∣palensis de of∣fic. eccles. l. 1. c. 10.
• i 1.258

  Hos. de sacro vernacule le∣gendo.
• k 1.259

  Brerewoods enquiries, c. 8.
• l 1.260

  Postel. de lin∣guâ Dalmatica.
• m 1.261

  Lib. 4. p. 434.
• * 1.262

  Litteras Ve∣nedas.
• n 1.263

  De missá lati∣nè faciendâ, in locis commu∣nibus.
• o 1.264

  Vbi supra.
• p 1.265

  De ration: scribendi cita∣tus à Cassan∣dro liturgic: cap. 36.
• * 1.266

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Vbi supra.
• * 1.267

  Salsburge ho∣die appellatur.
• s 1.268

  De sacro ver∣nacule legen∣do.
• t 1.269

  De rebus Po∣loni. l. 3. p. 32.
• u 1.270

  Lib. 15. pag. 249.
• x 1.271

  Apud Baron. tom. 10. anno. 880. numero. 19. pag. 662. & inter epist. Ioannis. 8. a∣pud Binnium. epist: 247.
• y 1.272

  Hist. Bohem: cap. 13.
• z 1.273

  7 Lib. ep. 11.
• a 1.274

  Derebus Ec∣cles. c. 7.
• * 1.275

  Otfridus in∣ter epistolas Hincmari Rhe∣mensis in epi∣stolâ ad Luit∣berium excus. Par. 161•…•…. pag. 633. Theotisca lingua velut a∣grestis habetur, dum à propriis nec scripturâ, nec arte aliquâ ullis est tem∣poribus expo∣lita: quippe qui nec historias suorum ante∣cessorum ut multae gentes caeterae com∣mendant me∣moriae. Quod si raro contigit, aliarum genti∣um linguam, id est Latino∣rum, vel potius Graecorum explanant.
• b 1.276

  Inter episto∣las Hincmari praefatio in li∣brum antiqu•…•… linguá Saxoni∣câ scriptum pag. 634.
• * 1.277

  Poeticè trans∣ferre.
• c 1.278

  Io. Trevilan. vbi supra.
• d 1.279

  Hist. Anglor. l. 4. cap. 24.
• e 1.280

  In proemio citatus à Cas∣sandro liturgie. c. 36.
• f 1.281

  In fine lib: 3. contra haere∣ses.
• g 1.282

  Vbi supra.
• h 1.283

  Cap. 14.
• * 1.284

  Sedulius in 1. Cor. 14. Qui nullam praeter propriam in∣telligit linguā, quod proprium est auditoribus, quomodo di∣cet amen? hoc est, quomodo tuae benedicti∣oni perhibebit testimonium vel consensum, cum ignoret ipsius lingu ae qualitatem?
• i 1.285

  In 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Cor. 14.
• k 1.286

  opusc. tom. 3. tract. 15.
• l 1.287

  instruct. Chri∣stian.
• m 1.288

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Article •…•…3. division.
• n 1.289

  Cap. Quoni∣am in ple•…•…que extra: de offi∣ciis iudicis or∣dinarii.
• * 1.290

  Hosius de sa∣cro vernacule legendo p 665. sayth the Pope meant not to make any inno∣uation, but his meaning was that the Graeci∣ans and Sclauo∣nians that al∣ready 300 yeare had the seruice in their owne tongue should haue priests to say seruice vnto them in the same.
• o 1.291

  Cap. 71.
• p 1.292

  Anno 1562 apud Goldas∣tum constit im∣perial tom. 2 p. 376.
• q 1.293

  Apud Gold. constit. imper. tom. 3. p. 570.
• r 1.294

  De sacramen. eucharist. pag. 134.
• * 1.295

  s De mod o∣randi.
• t 1.296

  Defensio. li de officio pij viri. pag. 141.
• a 1.297

  Cameracen∣sis 〈◊〉〈◊〉 senten: d. 1. q 2. Scotus lib 3. d 27. quaest. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.298

  b Degratiâ pri∣mi hominis l. vnic. c. 5.
• * 1.299

  All the know∣ledge that natu∣rally we haue of God is by considering those perfections that are found in the creatures, that implye in them no imperfection, and which whatsoeuer hath, is better then those things are that haue th•…•… not: for perswading our selues that they are some where found in the highest degree, and without that mixture of imperfection that cleaueth to them in this or that particular, wee name that thing God, wherein they are so found in so excellent sort: now all these perfections that we conceiue and apprehend are fi∣nite, for they are perfections found and discerned in the creatures, and the degrees of them, are the degrees of things finite, so that vnlesse wee haue another illumination by grace, whereby wee may come to some apprehension of God, as he is in himselfe, we know not God as God, neither doe wee worship and honour him as God, because not as infinite, and all our worship is idolatrie, giuing that vnto the resemblance, that pertaineth to the trueth, as Cusanus sheweth at large de doctâ ignorantiâ l. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 c. 26.
• c 1.300

  Grego: Ari∣minensis l. 2. d. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. q. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• d 1.301

  vbi supra.
• * 1.302

  Sensitivus ap∣petitus rationis quasi particeps fuerat effectus, sed cum á deo voluntas ad se∣ipsam defecir, appetitus spre∣to rationis im∣perio sui iuris esse caepit: at{que} hinc innumerae cupidirates, in∣numeri timo∣res at{que} morbi, ex quo etiam factum est, vt cum in primo actionum sua∣rum prncipio occaecatus sit intellectus, & in particulari bono vltimum sinem colloca∣rit, & suae digni∣tatis ignarus in corpus sese & sensum de∣merserit, & in corporis natu∣ram degenera∣rit, in corporis volupratibus assequendis, & doloribus fugi∣endis finem su∣um constitue∣rit. Contare∣nus de libero arbitrio.
• e 1.303

  1. Sent. d. 3. q. 1.
• f 1.304

  Bonaventura itinerarium mentis in de∣um. c. 5.
• * 1.305

  Esse.
• g 1.306

  Bernard. serm. ad milit. Templi c. 11. de sepulchro.
• * 1.307

  p. 2. q. 105. memb. 2. art. 1.
• g 1.308

  2 sent. d. 29.
• h 1.309

  De correpti∣on. & grat. c. 11.
• * 1.310

  nihil
• * 1.311

  i De ciuitate Dei li. 12. c. 9.
• k 1.312

  De libero ar∣bit. l. 3. c. 17.
• l 1.313

  Enchirid. c. 24.
• m 1.314

  Cap. 39
• n 1.315

  De sacram. fidei l. 1. part 6 c. 12. 13. 14.
• o 1.316

  ibid. part. 7. c. 11. & 17.
• p 1.317

  Epist. 11. pag. 1406.
• q 1.318

  Contra Iuli∣anum Pelagia∣num, l. 4. c. 3.
• * 1.319

  Sequitur ibi∣dem apud Au∣gustinum. Sed forte dicturus es miseri•…•…ors voluntas bona est. Recte istud dice•…•…etur, si que madmo∣dum fides Christi, id est, fides quae per dilectionem operatur, semper est bona, ita misericordia semper esset bona; si autem reperitur & mi∣sericordia mala, qua persona pauperis accipitur in judicio, propter quam postremo rex Saul meruit à Domino v∣tique misericorde damnari, quia contra eius praeceptum captivo regi per humanum pepercit affectum, attentius cogita ne forte misericordia bona non sit, nisi quae huius bonae fidei fuerit. Imò responde, vt hoc sine dubitatione perspicias, vtrum bonam misericordiam existimes infidelem. Porto si vitium est male misereri, procul dubio viti∣um est infideliter misereri. Quod si & ipsa per seipsam naturali compassione opus est bonum, etiam isto bono male vtitur qui infideliter vtitur, & hoc bonum male facit, qui infideliter facit, qui autem male facit aliquid, pro∣fecto peccat. Ex quo colligitur etiam ipsa bona opera quae faciunt infideles, non ipsorum esse, sed illius qui bene vtitur malis. Ipsorum autem esse peccata, quibus & bona male faciunt, quia ea non fideli, sed infideli, h•…•…c est, stulta & noxi•…•… voluntate faciunt. Qualis voluntas nullo Christiano dubitante est arbor mala, quae facere non potest nisi fructus malos, id est, sola peccata. Omne enim, velis nolis, quod non est ex fide, pecca∣tum est.
• s 1.320

  August. ibid.
• t 1.321

  Ibid.
• u 1.322

  De civitate Dei, l. 19. c. 25.
• a 1.323

  August. in Ps. 31.
• b 1.324

  De civit. Dei l. 19. c. 25.
• c 1.325

  1 Lib. de vo∣catio: gentium cap. 7.
• d 1.326

  Cap. 1.
• e 1.327

  Lib. sent. ex Augustino sen∣tent. 106.
• f 1.328

  Qu•…•…st. 7.
• g 1.329

  Lib. 22. c. 10. super 31. cap. Iob.
• h 1.330

  Cap, 40.
• i 1.331

  Comment: in 14. caput: epi∣stolae ad Ro∣manos.
• k 1.332

  Citatus ab Ariminensi li. 2. d. 26. 27. 28. q. 1. artic. 1.
• l 1.333

  cap. 37.
• m 1.334

  De libertate Christianâ li. 2. cap. 34.
• n 1.335

  Cap. 35.
• o 1.336

  Explicat. Or∣thodoxae fidei pag 273.
• p 1.337

  Lib. de gratiá & libero arbi∣trio contra Cassianum, c •…•…9. definit. 8.
• q 1.338

  Lib. 6 d. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. pag. 4•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 431. &c.
• * 1.339

  He therefore saith. Duplici∣ter potest dici vera virtus. Primo. in or∣dine ad bo∣num particula∣re, & ad finem proximum e∣iusdem virtutis siue ad obie∣ctum illius particulare non apparens sed verè bo∣num, velut or∣dinabile quan∣tum est in se ad principale bo∣num quod est ultimus finis, ut dare eleemo∣synam ex na∣turali pietate non apponen∣do malam cir∣cumstantiam, est actus verae virtutis com∣paratione ob∣iecti seu boni particularis. Secundo com∣paratione ul∣timi finis seu boni vniuersa∣lis ut non tan∣tum in se ille actus sit ordi∣nabilis ad bo∣num principa∣le quod est finis ultimus, sed e∣tiam ex parte operantis refe∣ratur actu vel virtute.
• r 1.340

  Institutionis monasticae serm. 35.
• * 1.341

  Bellarm. de amissione gra∣tiae & statu peccati l. 5. c. 15 No new incli∣nation positiuely carries vs to euil, but the olde set free by losse of grace, as a thing propendeth to fall not by addi∣tion of new waight, but by taking away the former stay, and as a horse is incited to runne, not by the spurre, but by taking away the bridle.
• s 1.342

  De vocatione gentium l. 1. c. 6.
• t 1.343

  Cap 7.
• a 1.344

  Opuscul. tom. 2. tractatus 1. de concep: B. virginis. c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• b 1.345

  In 3. sent: d. 3. part. 1. artic. 1. q. 2.
• c 1.346

  In 3. l sent. d. 3: citatus à Ca∣ietano vbi su∣pra.
• d 1.347

  In 3. sent. d. 3. q. 1.
• e 1.348

  3. Lib. dist. 3.
• f 1.349

  Antoninus sum. p. 1. tit. 8. c. 2. prope fi∣nem.
• g 1.350

  Tractatus ci∣tati superius c. 1
• * 1.351

  h Cap. cum ex iniuncto extra: de haereticis.
• i 1.352

  Cap, 3.
• k 1.353

  Epist. 174.
• * 1.354

  l Dist. 31. q. z. artic. 3.
• m 1.355

  Li. 3. d. 3.
• n 1.356

  De praesentiâ Dei ad Darda∣num ep. 57. post medium. p. 319.
• * 1.357

  Rom. 5. 12.
• p 1.358

  Homil. 17. in Lucam.
• q 1.359

  Apud Sixtum Senensem. li. 6. cap. 138.
• r 1.360

  Quaest: veteris & noui Testi∣menti q 73.
• s 1.361

  In 2. Luc.
• t 1.362

  Homil. 45. in Mathaeum.
• u 1.363

  Homil. 46. in Mathaeum.
• x 1.364

  Homil. in Io∣annem 20.
• y 1.365

  Super Ma∣thaei 12. v. 48.
• z 1.366

  Lib. 6. c. 58.
• a 1.367

  De naturà & gratiâ contra Pelagianos lib. uni•…•…. cap. 36.
• b 1.368

  ubi suprà.
• c 1.369

  vide Baronii Martyrologium mens. Septemb.
• d 1.370

  vbi supra.
• e 1.371

  Can. 36.
• f 1.372

  Ex capitula∣ribus Caroli magni & Lu∣dovici Pij, l. 1. c. 164 l. 2 c. 35. l. 6. c. 186. citat. à Baronio in Martyrol. sep∣temb.
• a 1.373

  De amissione gratiae & statu peccati, l. 6. c. 1.
• * 1.374

  But Bona∣ventura sent. l. 2. d 33. art. 2. quaest. 2: shew∣eth, that if they haue any such do∣lour and greife it is without pati∣ence and hope, & so ioyned with murmuring and despaire; and if it proceed from deli∣beration, it can∣not be without a∣ctuall obliquity, neither can it but redound into the flesh: so that if there be any such greife, there is not onely privatiue, but positiue and sensible greife al∣so, there is there∣fore a worme and bell punishment.
• b 1.375

  De fide ad Petrum, c. 27.
• c 1.376

  De gratiá & libero arbitrio, l. 1 tract. 3. c. 2.
• d 1.377

  Contra Iuli. anum, l. 5. c. 8.
• e 1.378

  Hypognost. l. 5.
• a 1.379

  De doctrin. iustificationis l. 3. c. 7. p. 67.
• b 1.380

  Contra Iuli∣an. lib. 5. c. 3.
• c 1.381

  Lib. 3. c. 26
• d 1.382

  De amiss. gra∣tiae & statu pec∣cati, l. 5. c. 13.
• e 1.383

  Cap. 13.
• f 1.384

  Cap. 14.
• g 1.385

  Cap. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• i 1.386

  Contra Iuli∣an. l. 6. c. 6.
• * 1.387

  Contra Iuli∣anum l. 2. prope finem pag. 332. In baptismate mortuum est peccatum in to reatu quo nos tenebat: & iam non eodem modo appella∣tur peccatum quo facit reum, sed quod sit re∣atu primi ho∣minis factum, & quod rebel∣lando nos tra∣here nitatur ad reatum, nisi ad∣iuvet nos gra∣tia Dei per se∣fum Christum Dominum no∣strum, ne sic etiam mortuum peccatum re∣bellet, ut vin∣cendo revivis∣cat & regnet.
• * 1.388

  k L. 2. d. 31. q. 1. art 4.
• * 1.389

  l Cap. 39.
• m 1.390

  Dist. 3•…•….
• n 1.391

  Vbi supra.
• o 1.392

  In consultati∣one de articu∣lis religionis artic. 2.
• p 1.393

  formula con∣cordiae de pec∣cato originis & concup•…•…centiá i•…•…ta Worma∣tiae ann. 1541. inter Eccium & Mensingum, item Bucerum & Philippum Melanctho∣nem, vt reperi∣tur ibidem a∣pud Cassan∣drum.
• * 1.394

  p Compend. theolog. verita∣tis. lib. 3. qui in∣scribitur de cor∣ruptelà pecca: cap. 10.
• * 1.395

  a De amissione gratiae & statu peccati l. 1. c. 4.
• b 1.396

  Ce vitâ ispiri∣tuali lect. 1.
• c 1.397

  Primâ lecun∣dae quaest. 87. art. 5.
• d 1.398

  Part. 1. sol. •…•…43.
• e 1.399

  Iacobus Al∣main in tracta∣tu 3. c. 20. Rof∣fensis in refuta∣tione articuli 32 Lutheri ci∣tat•…•… à Bellarmi∣no de am•…•…ssione gratiae l. 1. c. 4.
• * 1.400

  Bellarmine c. 11. affirmeth, that veniall sins are not against, but beside the law; but Duran∣dus, and others teach, that when men sin venially, they doe that the law forbiddeth, & so do contrary to the law, not only besides it: Dur. l 2. d. 42 q 6.
• f 1.401

  De gratiâ & libero arbit. c. 16
• g 1.402

  Alvarez de auxiliis diuinae gratiae disput. 86. lect. 8.
• * 1.403

  Facere vt ve∣limus est ope∣rar•…•… in nobis a∣liquid quo dis∣ponamur & ef∣ficaciter incli∣nemur & de∣terminemur ad volendum Al∣va:
• * 1.404

  h Vide Chem∣nicij examen de cretide libe∣ro arbitrio.
• i 1.405

  En•…•…hirid. cap. 30.
• * 1.406

  Al•…•…recte faci∣endi licentiam.
• k 1.407

  Bernard in cant. serm. 81.
• * 1.408

  Anima•…•…a ca∣rentia ratione carent liberta∣te, sensu agun∣tur, feruntur impetu, rapiun∣tur appetitu, neque enim iudicium ha∣bent quo se di∣iudicent siue regant•…•…sed ne instrumentum quidem iudicij rationé. Hanc vim à natur•…•… solus homo non patitur, & ideo solus inter anim•…•…tia liber: & tamen inter∣veniente pec∣cato patitur quandam vim & ipse, sed à vo∣luntate non à naturá; vt ne sic quidem in∣genitá liberta∣te privetur; quod enim vo∣luntarium, & liberum Ber∣nard. ibidem. Ioan. 8.
• l 1.409

  Hypognost. l. 3. August. lib. 1. retract. c. 15. voluntas in tantum libera est, quia in tan∣tum liberata est: alioquin tota cupiditas, quae voluntas propriè nuncu∣panda est. Ep. 106. sine gra∣tiâ nos dicimus ad non peccan∣dum nihil vo∣luntatis arbi∣trium valere. Prosper contra: Collatorem c 19. saith that man since the fall Labitur memo∣riâ errat iudi∣cio, nutat in∣cessu. And cap. 21. Infidelitas rapuit fidem, captivitas ab∣stulit liberta∣tem, nec potu∣it illic vlla por∣tio residere vir∣tutum, quo t•…•…∣ta irruperat •…•…ma vitiorum. Aug. de spiritu & literâ c. 3. Liberum arbitrium nihil nisi ad peccandum valet si lateat veritatis 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…ut si agnita veritas non delectet & ametur.
• m 1.410

  Lib. 2. d. 29 art. 2.
• n 1.411

  Hypognost. l. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• o 1.412

  L. 2. d. 28. q. 1. art. 1.
• p 1.413

  Compend. theol. veritatis l. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 2.
• q 1.414

  Compend. theol. veritatis l. 2. c. 56. Aqui, •…•…a adae. q. 109. art. 6. Praeparatio ad fruendum Deo per donum ha∣bituale: ad sus∣ceptionem hu∣ius doni, per auxilium Dei intus moventis animam & in∣spirantis bo∣num proposi∣tum.
• r 1.415

  Compend. theol. veritatis l. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. qui est de corruptel•…•… pec∣cati c. 10. Sap. 9.
• s 1.416

  Lib. 2. d. 41.
• a 1.417

  In Psal. 13.
• * 1.418

  b Lib. 6. d. 50.
• c 1.419

  Consult. art. 18.
• * 1.420

  d De gratia & li•…•…o arbitrio 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…tio.
• e 1.421

  Camaracen∣sis. 1. sent. d. 1. q. 2. art. 2. ait multos docto∣res asserere ho∣minem e•…•…tra gratiam per so∣la naturalia posse diligere Deum super omnia.
• f 1.422

  De Iustificat. l. 2 cap. 4. Respectu pri∣ma gratia, me∣ritum ex con∣gruo jampri∣dem explosum est. Stapleton ibid.
• g 1.423

  Bellarmide gratia & libero arbitrio, l. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & cap. 9.
• h 1.424

  De gratia & libero •…•…bit. 10, l. 6. c. 7.
• i 1.425

  I•…•… primam se∣cundae quaest. 109. art. 3.
• k 1.426

  vbi supra, l. 5. c. 9.
• l 1.427

  L. 5. c. 5.
• m 1.428

  vbi supra l. 5. c. 9.
• n 1.429

  De liber. arb.
• o 1.430

  De praedest.
• p 1.431

  In 1. sent. q. 6. prolog. art. 3. & 2. sent. d. 28. q. 5.
• q 1.432

  Lib. 7. d. 55.
• * 1.433

  * Aug. l. 1. quae∣stionum ad Simplicianum Quare tamen & huic ita, & huic non i∣ta? Homo tu quis es? debi∣tum si non reddishabes quod gratule∣ris: si reddis non habes quod quetaris.
• r 1.434

  •…•…bi supra.
• * 1.435

  s Aluarez. li. 9. disp. 97.
• * 1.436

  Cap•…•…eolus.
• t 1.437

  Lib. 9. d. 94.
• u 1.438

  Gocch. ibid. l. 2. c. 23.
• x 1.439

  Cap. 20.
• y 1.440

  M•…•…scel. 2. l. 2. ut. 137.
• a 1.441

  Scotus l. 1. d. 17. q. 2. art. 2. & l. 4 d. 1. q. 6.
• b 1.442

  Annos 541.
• * 1.443

  And to this purpose it is that the Protestant divines doe vrge that the word of iustifying is ver∣bum forense, & that it signisyeth as much as to pronounce for one in iudgement; which may bee conceiued two wayes; first so as to cleere him from the imputa∣tion of hauing sinned, that bath sinned, and to pronounce that he hath done righteously that hath not; and in this sense if God should iustifie the sinner, his iudge∣ment were not right; and to at∣as this to him were absurde, as our aduersaries rightly tell us: or else, to cleere and free one from punishment, as if he had neuer offended, and to adiudge such freedome to him as righteous men are wont to enioy, such as he might looke for, if righteous, and to graunt him the gift of renovation making him accline ill and doe good.
• c 1.444

  Lib. 15: c. 5.
• d 1.445

  Lib. 15. c. 2.
• * 1.446

  e Epistol. 109.
• f 1.447

  Cap. 3.
• * 1.448

  g Cap. 10.
• h 1.449

  Sermon. in coena domini.
• i 1.450

  L. 83. q. q. 68.
• k 1.451

  De iustifica∣tione.
• l 1.452

  Art. 8. pag. 28 29. 30.
• m 1.453

  L. 14. c. 17
• n 1.454

  Iob. 14
• o 1.455

  Psal. 143. ps. 32.
• p 1.456

  2 de peccat. meritis c. 7.
• q 1.457

  Homil 57.
• r 1.458

  Iob. 7.
• s 1.459

  Numer. 20.
• t 1.460

  Aug. de vtili∣tate p•…•…t.
• * 1.461

  v Aug 2. de pecc•…•…torum meritis & re∣•…•…:
• * 1.462

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 P•…•… 9•…•….
• a 1.463

  2 contra Marc.
• b 1.464

  Li. 3. ad Qui∣rin.
• c 1.465

  In Ps. 118.
• d 1.466

  In Ionam.
• * 1.467

  e Q•…•…r 8. ad A gas.
• f 1.468

  Li 2. de pec cat. meritis & re•…•…i: cap. 14.
• * 1.469

  g Cap. 13.
• h 1.470

  De bono per∣severantiae.
• i 1.471

  Homil. 58.
• k 1.472

  De ecclesiast. dogmat. c. 49.
• l 1.473

  Moral. 18. c. 4.
• m 1.474

  De praecept. & dispens.
• o 1.475

  De perfect. iustit. resp. 17.
• p 1.476

  Moral. 21. c. 9
• * 1.477

  Vegal. 14. c.
• q 1.478

  Ps. 118.
• r 1.479

  L. 14. c. 21.
• a 1.480

  Iustificat. l. 6. cap. 2.
• b 1.481

  De spiritu & littera. c. 19.
• c 1.482

  Cap. 9.
• d 1.483

  Cap. 30.
• e 1.484

  Contra Fau∣stum l. 19. c. 31.
• f 1.485

  Lib. 17. c. 6.
• * 1.486

  g Cap. 3.
• h 1.487

  Concil. Mile∣uita. Can. 6. 7. & 8. Concil. Aphrica. c. 81. & sequen. Aug. l 2 de peccato: meritis & re∣missi. De spiri∣tu & litt. lib. 4. contra ep. Pe∣lagiani de per∣fect: Iustitiae.
• i 1.488

  2 Chron. 19.
• k 1.489

  2 Chron. 32.
• l 1.490

  Contra Pelag. lib. 3.
• * 1.491

  m Lib. de eccle∣siasti: dogmati∣bus c. 86.
• * 1.492

  n cap. 5.
• o 1.493

  cap. 6.
• p 1.494

  Leo de qua. dra•…•…. ser. 2.
• q 1.495

  August. in Ps. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• r 1.496

  Cap. 8.
• * 1.497

  Chemniti∣us (saith Bellar∣mine de iusti∣fic. l 4. c. 14.) v•…•…geth that hee that fulfilleth the whole law a•…•…b no sinne, that in many things wee si ne all and that therefore 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 the whole law. This argument they doe not well answere, that thinke veniall sinnes to bee properly sinnes and against the law, s•…•… •…•…cy must •…•…ay it is possible to fulfill, not because it may wholly be kept, but in the greater part. Thomas 1. 2. quest. 88. art. 1. a•…•…serit peccata ven•…•…ia, non esse peccata simpliciter, sed imperfectè, & secundum quid, neque esse contra le∣gem, sed praeter legem.
• s 1.498

  Lib. 14. cap. 13.
• t 1.499

  9 Moral. c. 1:
• u 1.500

  Li. 11. c. 40.
• x 1.501

  De Iustific. li. 6. c. 21.
• y 1.502

  De perfect. iustitiae.
• z 1.503

  Stapl. ib. c. 10.
• a 1.504

  August. l. 4. c. 2. contra Iulian
• b 1.505

  Stapl 16. c. 11.
• c 1.506

  Contra Luci∣ferianos.
• d 1.507

  In Cantica serm. 50.
• * 1.508

  Qui gloriatur in domino glo∣rietur.
• e 1.509

  De justificat. art. 8. p. 19.
• f 1.510

  Posid. de vitâ Aug. c. 27.
• g 1.511

  Guil. in vitâ Bernard. c. 12.
• h 1.512

  De simil. c. 6.
• i 1.513

  Hosius Tom. 1. pag. 291. con∣fessionis Ca∣thol. c. 73.
• k 1.514

  Ibid p. 292.
• l 1.515

  Citat: ab Ho∣sio: ibid.
• m 1.516

  Hosius ibid
• n 1.517

  Es: 38.
• o 1.518

  De verbis E∣saiae Vidi do∣minum seden∣tem &c. serm. 5.
• p 1.519

  Ps. 22.
• * 1.520

  Gal. 9. Iob. 7.
• q 1.521

  In 4. sent. de sacram. Euchar. •…•…ol. 61.
• r 1.522

  Fol. 138.
• s 1.523

  Fol. 138.
• t 1.524

  De certitudi∣ne salutss.
• u 1.525

  Pag. 500.
• * 1.526

  x Pag. 463.
• b 1.527

  In confuta∣tione Prole∣gomenon Brent•…•…l. 5. in fine.
• * 1.528

  c pag. 475.
• d 1.529

  In fide & Iu∣stific. fol. 45.
• e 1.530

  pag. 46.
• f 1.531

  Fol. 47.
• g 1.532

  Fol. 30.
• h 1.533

  Apud Gol∣dast. constit. imper. tom. 2.
• i 1.534

  Lib. 7. c. 21.
• k 1.535

  Lib. 7. c. 23.
• * 1.536

  1. Iohn 1. If we say wee haue •…•…o sinne wee de∣ceiue our selues &c. but if wee confesse our sins, God is faithfull and iust to remit vnto vs our sins, and to cleanse vs •…•…om all iniquity; this perpetuali wishing away of sinnes C•…•…rist sig∣n•…•…fied lotione pedum.
• * 1.537

  Hugo de san∣cto victore de sacramentis fi∣dei l. 2. part. 13. c. 12. sed di∣cunt. si Dauid peccando cha∣ritatem amisit: quomodo ergo verum est, qd scriptum est de ipso, quòd spi∣ritus Domini non recedebat a Dauid, ab eo die & de inceps? Si enim chari∣tas recessit: quomodo spi∣ritus Domini remansit? Qua∣si vero spiritus domini secūdū multa alia re∣manere non potuerit, etiam∣si secundum donum chari∣tatis recesserit. Nonne & in il∣lis siue cum illis remanet, quos cadentes custo∣dit nè pereant: quos tamen stantes non cu∣stodit nè ca∣dant? Iustus cum ceciderit non collidetur: qiua Dominus supponit ma∣num suam.
• l 1.538

  In 4. sent. dist. 22. q. 1. art. 2.
• m 1.539

  In 4. senten. d. 22. q. 1.
• n 1.540

  St. de. justific. l. 2. c. 4.
• * 1.541

  In that God •…•…ath promised r•…•…ssion to all that truely turne, and he findeth his heart to be so tur∣n•…•…d.
• a 1.542

  L. 9. c 36.
• b 1.543

  Considerat. 2. ult. cap. 2. ad Tim.
• c 1.544

  Consult. art. 4.
• d 1.545

  part. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• e 1.546

  part. 1. de grata, c. 10.
• a 1.547

  Vega. l. 9. c. 7.
• b 1.548

  Vega. l. 9. c. 46
• * 1.549

  Sessio 6. can. 13. Si quis dix∣erit, omni ho∣mini ad remis∣sionem pecca∣torum asse∣quendam ne∣cessarium esse, vt credat cer∣tò, & absque vllâ haesitatio∣ne propriae in∣firmitatis & indispositionis peccata sibi esse remissa, ana∣thema sit.
• c 1.550

  pag 162.
• d 1.551

  1. parte iusti∣tiae quadripar∣titae, l. 2. fol. 222.
• e 1.552

  L. 9. c. 39.
• * 1.553

  Vega l. 9. ca. 47. Dispositio non vnum a∣liquem actum, comprehendit, sed observatio∣nem omnium mandatorum diuinorum, & dolorem de omnibus pec∣catis, & in nul∣lo peccato per∣seuerare, ne{que} per ignoranti∣am, neque per negligentiam, neque per ob∣liuionem aut in considerati∣onem•…•…
• s 1.554

  Vega. l. 9. c. 39.
• * 1.555

  If a man may know that hee sorroweth right∣ly for one sinne, he is sure he sor∣roweth for all as much as is neces∣sarily required to iustification.
• g 1.556

  L•…•…. 9. c. 46.
• h 1.557

  Ibid. apud Veg.
• i 1.558

  Ib. apud Veg.
• k 1.559

  Ibidem.
• l 1.560

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• m 1.561

  Apud Bucer. pag. 45.
• a 1.562

  Vide Ianseni um•…•…n concor∣diam euangeli∣•…•…am cap. 98. p. 704.
• * 1.563

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Lib. 1. d. 17 q. 1. in solutione quaest.
• * 1.564

  * Apostolus ad Rom: 8. Aesti∣mo inquit qd non sunt con∣dignae passio∣nes hujus tem∣poris, ad futu∣•…•…am gloriam quae re•…•…elabi∣tur in nobis. S•…•… non sunt con∣d•…•…gnae non er∣go ex debito justitiae, sed ex dono gratiae, gloria pro il•…•…s datur, unde Glossa ibidem. passiones hu∣jus temporis non s•…•…t omnes s•…•…mul con•…•…g nae, id est, suffi∣cientes, si di∣stricte agere∣tur nob•…•…m, ad promeren∣dam •…•…tam ae∣ternam.
• b 1.565

  Bellarm. de justificat. lib. 5. c. 12.
• c 1.566

  De justificat. l. 5. c. 20.
• * 1.567

  Gregor. 1. d. 17. q. 1. Duran. q. 2. Marsil. in 2. Walden. de sa∣cram. c. 7. Bur∣gensis in psal. 35. Eckius in centur: de prae∣dest.
• d 1.568

  Lib. 1. d. 17. quaest. 1.
• e 1.569

  L. 2. d. 27. q. 2. item l. 1, d. 17. q. 2.
• * 1.570

  Psal. 17.
• f 1.571

  Epist. 19.
• g 1.572

  Lib. 1. c. 39.
• h 1.573

  Citatus ab Hosio conf. ca∣thol. c. 73. tom. r. p. 286.
• i 1.574

  Apud. Hos. ib.
• k 1.575

  Citatus ab Hosio ibid.
• l 1.576

  Sophoniae vlt.
• a 1.577

  De consilijs Evangelicis & statu perfectio∣nis.
• b 1.578

  In concordiā evangelicam, c. 100.
• c 1.579

  In sent. l. 3. d. 34. qu. 3.
• d 1.580

  Bellar. lib. 2. de Monachis. cap. 6.
• a 1.581

  Li. 1. d. 40. qu. 1. art. 2.
• b 1.582

  In 1 sent. q. 12
• a 1.583

  L. 4. d. 26. q. 3.
• b 1.584

  L. 8. c. 5.
• c 1.585

  Part. 4. q. 5. memb. 2. art. 1. q. 5. memb. 3. art 2. q. 9. memb. 2. art. 2.
• d 1.586

  De sacram. in genere l. 1. de definit. Sacram. c. 9.
• a 1.587

  Quolib. 3. q. 1. art. 2.
• b 1.588

  Lib. 4. dist. 10. quaest. 2.
• c 1.589

  Lib. 4. dist. 11. q. 1. &. 11.
• d 1.590

  Li. 4. q 4.
• a 1.591

  In 3 part. qu. 75. art. 1.
• b 1.592

  Lib. 4. dist. 11. qu. 2.
• c 1.593

  Centilogij conclus. 39.
• d 1.594

  4. sent. q 6.
• e 1.595

  Tom. 2. de sa∣cram. Eucha∣ristiae, cap. 43.
• f 1.596

  Cap. 19.
• g 1.597

  Cap. 64:
• a 1.598

  4. part. qu. 1•…•…. memb. 2. art. 2.
• b 1.599

  Lib. 4 sent. dist. 12. art. 3. qu. 1.
• a 1.600

  In Canonem Missae lect. 85
• b 1.601

  2 Tom. contr. 3. l. 5. de Eucha∣ristia qui est 1. de missa, c. 15.
• a 1.602

  L. 1. dist. 45. quaest. 1.
• b 1.603

  Lib. 4. dist. 21. quaest. 1.
• c 1.604

  Lib. 4. q. 15. mem. 3. art 3.
• d 1.605

  Dialog. lib. 4. c. 46.
• e 1.606

  In Psal. qui habitat, •…•…er. 10.
• a 1.607

  Bellarm. li. 2. de Purgatorio, cap. 11.
• b 1.608

  Cap. 6.
• c 1.609

  Cap. 9.
• d 1.610

  In dist. 19. qu. 3. art. 2.
• e 1.611

  Cap. 13.
• f 1.612

  Li. 4. dist. 45. quaest: 1.
• a 1.613

  In canone•…•… missae, lect. 31.
• b 1.614

  Lib. 4. d. 45.
• c 1.615

  De Sacram: lib: 2. cap. 11.
• d 1.616

  In 4 sent. li. 3. tract. 8. cap. 5. quaest. 6.
• a 1.617

  Rational. di∣vin l. 2. de pi∣cturis.
• b 1.618

  De defect. vi∣ror. Eccles.
• c 1.619

  In Psal. 113.
• a 1.620

  Panopliae l. 4. c. 70.
• b 1.621

  Part. 4. q. 21. memb. 1. Bo∣navent. in 4. dist. 18. art. 2. q. 1.
• a 1.622

  Opusc. tom. 1. tract. 15. c. 1. 2. 3.
• b 1.623

  Opusc. tom 1. tract. 8 qu. 3.
• c 1.624

  In 4. dist. 20. quaest. 3.
• d 1.625

  De indulgen. tijs consid. 2.
• e 1.626

  Consid. 11.
• f 1.627

  Consid. 8.
• a 1.628

  Cont. 3. q. 4.
• a 1.629

  Doctrinal. fi∣dei, lib. 2. art 3. quaest. 78.
• b 1.630

  De potestate ecclesiastica cnosid. 12.